processes

Review
A Review on Antimicrobial Packaging for Extending the Shelf
Life of Food
Tobi Fadiji 1 , Mahdi Rashvand 2 , Michael O. Daramola 1 and Samuel A. Iwarere 1, *

1 Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Built Environment and Information

Technology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa
2 School of Agriculture, Forestry, Food and Environmental Science, University of Basilicata, 85100 Potenza, Italy
* Correspondence: samuel.iwarere@up.ac.za

Abstract: Food packaging systems are continually impacted by the growing demand for minimally
processed foods, changing eating habits, and food safety risks. Minimally processed foods are
prone to the growth of harmful microbes, compromising quality and safety. As a result, the need for
improved food shelf life and protection against foodborne diseases alongside consumer preference for
minimally processed foods with no or lesser synthetic additives foster the development of innovative
technologies such as antimicrobial packaging. It is a form of active packaging that can release
antimicrobial substances to suppress the activities of specific microorganisms, thereby improving food
quality and safety during long-term storage. However, antimicrobial packaging continues to be a very
challenging technology. This study highlights antimicrobial packaging concepts, providing different
antimicrobial substances used in food packaging. We review various types of antimicrobial systems.
Emphasis is given to the effectiveness of antimicrobial packaging in various food applications,
including fresh and minimally processed fruit and vegetables and meat and dairy products. For
the development of antimicrobial packaging, several approaches have been used, including the
use of antimicrobial sachets inside packaging, packaging films, and coatings incorporating active
antimicrobial agents. Due to their antimicrobial activity and capacity to extend food shelf life,
regulate or inhibit the growth of microorganisms and ultimately reduce the potential risk of health
hazards, natural antimicrobial agents are gaining significant importance and attention in developing
antimicrobial packaging systems. Selecting the best antimicrobial packaging system for a particular
product depends on its nature, desired shelf life, storage requirements, and legal considerations. The
Citation: Fadiji, T.; Rashvand, M.; current review is expected to contribute to research on the potential of antimicrobial packaging to
Daramola, M.O.; Iwarere, S.A. A
extend the shelf life of food and also serves as a good reference for food innovation information.
Review on Antimicrobial Packaging
for Extending the Shelf Life of Food.
Keywords: food packaging; antimicrobial agent; active packaging; shelf life; fruit and vegetables;
Processes 2023, 11, 590. https://
meat products
doi.org/10.3390/pr11020590

Academic Editor: Yixiang Wang

Received: 20 December 2022

Revised: 11 February 2023
1. Introduction
Accepted: 11 February 2023 Packaging is a crucial phase in the food manufacturing process since it preserves
Published: 15 February 2023 the quality of food products for storage, transportation, and end-use [1–3]. Packaging is
necessary for fresh and processed food products to protect against external factors such
as contaminants, gas composition, spoilage bacteria, mechanical loadings, and physical
damage [4–9]. A food product’s quality can deteriorate physiologically, chemically, and
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. physically throughout distribution. Food packaging extends the shelf life of food products
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
while ensuring their quality and safety [3,10]. Packaging plays a vital role in the postharvest
This article is an open access article
handling and transportation of fresh and processed food and other biomaterials [4,11–13].
distributed under the terms and
Nowadays, the increase in consumer demand for minimally processed foods prone to
conditions of the Creative Commons
spoilage compromises food safety and quality [14–16]. Food spoilage caused by microbial
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
growth or activity is the most prevalent cause of food degradation, making the food
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
unsafe for consumption and resulting in food loss [17,18]. This has spurred the need for
4.0/).

Processes 2023, 11, 590. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11020590 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/processes

 Nowadays, the increase in consumer demand for minimally processed foods prone
to spoilage compromises food safety and quality [14–16]. Food spoilage caused by micro-
Processes 2023, 11, 590
bial growth or activity is the most prevalent cause of food degradation, making the2food of 30
unsafe for consumption and resulting in food loss [17,18]. This has spurred the need for
innovations in food packaging technologies, which involve contributions from engineers,
microbiologists, food scientists, chemists, regulators, and other professionals [19]. One
innovations in food packaging technologies, which involve contributions from engineers,
such technological advancement in food packaging is the development of active packag-
microbiologists, food scientists, chemists, regulators, and other professionals [19]. One
ing. Active packaging serves functions other than conventional protection and providing
such technological advancement in food packaging is the development of active packaging.
an inert barrier to the external environment, and it is designed to safeguard food quality
Active packaging serves functions other than conventional protection and providing an
[20].
inert barrier to the external environment, and it is designed to safeguard food quality [20].
Active packaging can be described as a form of packaging in which the package, the
Active packaging can be described as a form of packaging in which the package, the
product, and the environment interact to extend shelf life or enhance safety or sensory
product, and the environment interact to extend shelf life or enhance safety or sensory
attributes while preserving product quality [21–24]. This is especially significant in fresh
attributes while preserving product quality [21–24]. This is especially significant in fresh
and extended shelf life foods. Food shelf life is “the period during which a food retains
and extended shelf life foods. Food shelf life is “the period during which a food retains
acceptable characteristics of flavor, colour, aroma, texture, nutritional value, and safety,
acceptable characteristics of flavor, colour, aroma, texture, nutritional value, and safety,
under defined
under defined environmental
environmentalconditions”
conditions”[10]. [10].According
According to Anwar
to Anwar andand
Warsiki
Warsiki[20],[20],
ac-
tive packaging is designed to detect changes in the internal environment
active packaging is designed to detect changes in the internal environment and respond and respond by
altering the package’s characteristics to prolong the shelf life of foods. That
by altering the package’s characteristics to prolong the shelf life of foods. That is, active is, active pack-
aging design
packaging involves
design incorporating
involves incorporatingactive substances
active substancesintended to betoreleased
intended be releasedintointo
the
foodfood
the or absorbed
or absorbedintointo
or from the packed
or from the packedfoodfoodor the
orenvironment
the environment surrounding
surroundingthe food
the
(Figure 1) [15,24–26]. Hence, active packaging can be grouped into active
food (Figure 1) [15,24–26]. Hence, active packaging can be grouped into active scavenging scavenging sys-
tems (absorbers)
systems (absorbers)andand
active-releasing
active-releasingsystems (emitters).
systems WhileWhile
(emitters). absorbers remove
absorbers unde-
remove
undesirable substances such as moisture, carbon dioxide, oxygen, ethylene, UV light,from
sirable substances such as moisture, carbon dioxide, oxygen, ethylene, UV light, etc., etc.,
food food
from or theorenvironment,
the environment,emitters add substances
emitters add substancessuch such
as antimicrobial compounds,
as antimicrobial compounds, car-
bon dioxide,
carbon antioxidants,
dioxide, andand
antioxidants, flavors to packed
flavors foodfood
to packed or theorheadspace
the headspace[25,27]. An over-
[25,27]. An
view of the
overview ofactive packaging
the active packaginggrouping
groupingis shown in Figure
is shown 1. These
in Figure active
1. These packaging
active sys-
packaging
tems cancan
systems be be
prepared
prepared bybyincorporation,
incorporation,coating,
coating,immobilization,
immobilization,or or surface
surface modification
modification
onto the packaging
packaging materials
materials [28].
[28].

Figure 1. Illustration of the active scavenging and releasing systems used in food packaging.
Figure 1. Illustration of the active scavenging and releasing systems used in food packaging.

Over the
Over the years,
years, consumers’
consumers’ surge
surge of
of interest
interest in
in minimally
minimally processed
processed and
and additive-
additive-
free foods has resulted in the ongoing development of an intriguing innovation
free foods has resulted in the ongoing development of an intriguing innovation in in active
active
packaging known as antimicrobial packaging [10,20]. Antimicrobial packaging
packaging known as antimicrobial packaging [10,20]. Antimicrobial packaging systems systems
are based on packaging materials with incorporated antimicrobial agents in the packaging
matrix and/or antimicrobial polymers [20]. When a packaging system (or material) obtains
antimicrobial activity, it inhibits or prevents microbial development by extending the lag
time and reducing the growth rate or decreasing microbe live counts. Hence, antimicrobial
packaging helps inhibit spoilage and reduce pathogenic microorganisms by incorporating
packaging with antimicrobials, consequently extending food shelf life by prolonging the lag
Processes 2023, 11, 590 3 of 30

period of microorganisms, thereby diminishing their growth and number [20,29]. Antimi-
crobial packaging is intended to act against microorganisms and enhance the functions of
conventional food packaging, which are (1) shelf life extension, (2) maintenance of quality,
and (3) safety assurance [15,22,29].
There are several excellent recent reviews on food packaging systems, particularly
with active characteristics, including active packaging in the food industry/foods [23,25,30],
active packaging coatings [28,31], active edible films and packaging [31–33], natural antiox-
idants in active food packaging [34], innovative active, intelligent and smart packaging
technologies [35], active packaging applications to muscle foods [36], active packaging films
in the meat industry [37], active packaging in bakery products [38], and pectin-based active
packaging [39], to name a few examples. Given the promising reports and interventions
in antimicrobial packaging research to extend food shelf life and ensure food safety by
inhibiting microbial growth in packaged foods and packaging materials, this research area
has emerged as an independent focus area with positive consumer response. Therefore,
this current review provides a focused and precise concept of antimicrobial packaging for
extending the shelf life of food, emphasizing selected representative publications within
the last decade.

2. The Basic Concept of Antimicrobial Packaging

Generally, food products are prone to microbial contamination, which is one of the
main causes of foodborne diseases and constitutes a major public health concern and
economic burden on the food industry [14,40,41]. Antimicrobial food packaging aims at
reducing, inhibiting, or retarding the growth of spoilage or pathogenic microorganisms
that may be present in the packaged food or packaging material itself. Antimicrobial
packaging is an important system used as a delivery mechanism of antimicrobials to limit
the growth of microorganisms at all stages from transportation to final consumption [41,42].
Antimicrobial packaging systems involve incorporating antimicrobial agents into packaging
materials. The main objectives of these agents are to control or reduce the growth of
non-desirable microorganisms on the food surface. They are often transmitted from the
container to the food surface and utilized as coatings on various polymeric materials or in
the mass of the polymer. An antimicrobial agent’s activity is carried out either by contact
of microorganisms onto the interior surface of the packaging material or directly in the
food through emission or gradual diffusion of the antimicrobial agent from the packaging
material to the food [42,43]. Their controlled release throughout the food’s shelf life presents
a promising active packaging mechanism that ensures safety and improved shelf life [44].

3. Antimicrobial Substances/Agents in Food Packaging

Antimicrobial agents used in active packaging are expected to extend the lag phase
and reduce the growth rate of microorganisms, thus prolonging shelf life and maintaining
food safety [45]. Essentially, food-grade condition is a crucial requirement for formulat-
ing antimicrobial packaging systems. Hence, antimicrobial agents must be present at the
food surface above their minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) to be effective. Due to
variations in their physiologies, they have different activities on different pathogenic mi-
croorganisms [10]. The antimicrobial agent is integrated either directly into food particles or
into polymer film/packaging to suppress the activities of targeted microorganisms, such as
Listeria monocytogenes, Mycobacterium smegmatis (MTCC 943), Pseudomonas aeroginosa (MTCC
4676), Escherichia coli O157, Salmonella, Staphylococcus aureus, Bacillus cereus, Campylobacter,
Clostridium perfringens, Aspergillus niger, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, etc. [10]. Microorganism
characterization can be very beneficial in the selection of an antibacterial agent.
Despite their efficacy in extending food shelf life, some studies claimed that antimicro-
bial agents add to the complexity of packaging materials and induce changes in package
attributes (mechanical, thermal, permeability properties) as well as alter the appearance
of the packaging and the product [46–48]. Albeit, antimicrobial packaging improves the
performance of food packaging [49–51].
Processes 2023, 11, 590 4 of 30

Various antimicrobial agents may be incorporated into packaging systems. They in-
clude organic acids, mineral acids, inorganics, phenolic compounds, and isothiocyanates [22].
These antimicrobial agents can be categorized into natural or chemical (synthetic) agents.
Their application often depends on the packaging material. For instance, studies proposed
that potassium sorbate and nisin antimicrobial compounds added to a chitosan matrix
to create an active packaging film reduced the resistance and increased the flexibility of
the active film [52]. Similarly, Sung et al. [53] added Allium sativum essence oil (AEO)
into plastic films to test for antimicrobial activities against beef-related bacteria, namely
Listeria monocytogenes, Escherichia coli, and Brochothrix thermosphacta. The film’s mechan-
ical properties were slightly affected by the AEO, and a significant increase in the film
crystallinity with a small amount of incorporated AEO was reported [53].
Despite the approval of chemical antimicrobial agents (sodium benzoates and propi-
onates, potassium sorbates, sorbic acid, sulfites, chlorides, nitrites, triclosan, nisin, tartaric
acid, etc.) by regulatory agencies, many of these agents continue to pose nutritional or
health threats for the end-users [54–57]. As a result, natural antimicrobial agents are gaining
much importance and attention due to their antimicrobial activity potential to extend food
shelf life and control or prevent the growth of microorganisms [54,58,59]. Additionally,
consumer awareness of the potential adverse effect of synthetic or chemical preservatives
versus the advantages of natural additives/alternatives has increased the interest in de-
veloping and using natural products for food preservation and microorganism control
or prevention. These are commonly referred to as natural antimicrobial agents. Natural
additives come from organic matter and can be obtained from plants, animals, fungi, and
algae; hence, they reduce exposure to potential health hazards [55].
The extensive application of natural antimicrobial agents, primarily as preservatives
in fruit and vegetables, has been reported to ensure safety, protect the quality, and extend
shelf life [55]. Natural antimicrobials are secondary metabolites possessing antimicro-
bial activity [54,55,60]. They have antibacterial and antioxidant properties and are con-
sidered preferable alternatives to synthetic antimicrobials because they can be derived
from various sources, including plants, animals, and microorganisms which are the most
common [58,61–63]. According to several studies, most important natural antimicrobial
compounds are essential oils obtained from plants (e.g., basil, thyme, oregano, cinnamon,
clove, sage, vanillin, and rosemary); enzymes obtained from animal sources (e.g., lysozyme,
lactoferrin), bacteriocins from microbial sources (nisin, natamycin, lactocin, pediocin) and
organic acids (e.g., sorbic, propionic, citric acid) and naturally occurring polymers (chi-
tosan) [54,64,65].
Plants are considered the most important and rich natural source of antimicrobial
substances [54]. These plant compounds have antimicrobial, antioxidant, flavor, and color-
enhancing properties. These plant agent qualities lengthen the product’s shelf life and
improve its organoleptic acceptability. These compounds serve an important function
in inhibiting the growth of foodborne pathogens and, as a result, lowering the risk of
disease [54,62]. Therefore, they build consumer confidence regarding the consumption of
food products. Commercially based plant-origin antimicrobials are commonly produced by
SD (steam distillation) and HD (hydro-distillation) methods as well as alternative methods
such as SFE (supercritical fluid extraction) from aromatic and volatile oily liquids from
flowers, buds, seeds, leaves, twigs, bark, herbs, wood, fruits, and roots of plants [54].
The antimicrobial substances used to activate packaging materials can be included in
the groups of metals, chemicals, plant extracts, enzymes, and bacteriocins. The activities
of each address a restricted group of microorganisms, but their actions can be combined
with those of other hurdles to enlarge the spectrum of microbial targets. To inhibit the
growth of undesired microbes in food, natural antimicrobials can be directly added to the
product composition, coated on its surface, or incorporated into the packaging material.
Introducing active agents into food results in an immediate but short decrease in microbial
pathogens, whereas antimicrobial films can sustain their activity for an extended time [54].
Processes 2023, 11, 590 5 of 30

Antimicrobial packaging has attracted the attention of many researchers due to the
variety of materials used, its advantages and disadvantages, and the ability to improve
the shelf life of food and agricultural products. Most importantly, they help reduce,
inhibit, or retard spoilage microorganisms’ growth in food products, thus preventing food
spoilage and decay. One of the current challenges is the impact of antimicrobial agents
on packaging properties. For instance, the polymer is common for fabricating packaging
layouts [46], and studies have shown that antimicrobial agents alter the barrier properties
of polymer films [66,67]. Incorporating antimicrobial agents into polymer films enhances
the hydrophobic ratio, increasing the transfer coefficient while decreasing the water vapor
permeability (WVP) [68]. Furthermore, some antimicrobial agents, such as lactoperoxidase,
lysozyme, and lactoferrin, reduce the permeability properties of polymers [69]. Hence,
the use of nano-clay in combination with a polymeric material has been recommended by
different studies to improve the mechanical, thermal, and permeability properties [70–72].
In some cases, combining antimicrobial agents with polymers might have drawbacks
that limit large-scale production and increase production costs [73]. Although integrating
antimicrobial agents and polymers by extrusion is straightforward, some of the antimi-
crobial agents evaporate due to the high temperature caused by the extrusion process.
Furthermore, due to antimicrobial agent dispersion, the extrusion process results in antimi-
crobial agent loss [74]. As a result, researchers apply antimicrobial agents to the adhesive
layer that links the laminate’s various layers [75,76]. It has also been proposed to use
antimicrobial agent bags in inclusion complexes (ICs) [77,78]. Some researchers, however,
do not endorse this strategy due to customer reluctance to purchase this type of packaging.
Hence, various antimicrobial agents, including ICs, are inserted at the package’s bottom or
head (in the form of two or more layers) [79–81]. Table 1 shows the application of various
antimicrobial agents in previous research.
Table 1. Overview of the use of several antimicrobial agents in various products.

Antimicrobial Agent Utilization Method Food Product References

Sorbates Combination of antimicrobial agent with Cheese [82]
low-density polyethylene material
Potassium Sorbate The starch film incorporated with Sweet potato [83]
Chitosan antimicrobial agents
Lysozyme Layer by layer, assembled chitosan Pork [84]
organic rectorite
Butylated hydroxytoluene Incorporating the antimicrobial with Cereal [47]
High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE)
Sodium benzoate Edible active coatings (EACs) Strawberry [85]
Potassium sorbate incorporated with antimicrobial agents
Nisin Active multilayer bags (Low-Density Chicken drumsticks [86]
Chitosan Polyethylene (LDPE)/polyamide)
Potassium sorbate
Silver substituted zeolite
Benzoic acid Incorporating the antimicrobial substance Tomato puree [75]
Sodium metabisulphite into the adhesive layer
Tert-butylhydroquinone
Etil-N-lauroyl-L-arginine
Cinnamon essential oil
Oregano essential oil
N-α-lauroyl-l-arginine Casting of oxidized Chicken fillets [87]
starch gelatin solutions
ß-Cyclodextrin Packaging with a double-bottom Apple [88]
(with trapped antimicrobial volatile)
Oregano essential oil Resveratrol nanoemulsion Pork loin [89]
loaded edible pectin coating
Encapsulated cumin Encapsulated cumin seed essential Beef hamburger [90]
oil-loaded active papers
Processes 2023, 11, 590 6 of 30

4. Constructing/Developing an Antimicrobial Packaging

Most food packaging systems are represented by either a package/food system or a
package/headspace/food system [24]. A package/food system consists of a solid food
product in contact with the packaging material or a low-viscosity or liquid food with no
headspace [22,91]. The key migratory processes in this system include diffusion between
the packaging material and the food and partitioning at the interface. Depending on the
packaging material, type of antimicrobial agent, and the food product, antimicrobial agents
are added to the packaging material. The addition may be through immobilization, coating,
or simple blending with the packaging materials. The incorporated antimicrobial agents
then migrate into the food through diffusion and partitioning [22,24], although immobilized
agents cannot migrate [91].
Generally, antimicrobial packaging systems can be considered as migrating or nonmi-
grating, which is a function of the antimicrobial agent and its integration with the packaging
material and food matrix [55,92]. For instance, while the active agent is released into and
onto the package headspace and food surface, respectively, from the packaging material in
a migrating system, the active agent is immobilized with the material in a nonmigrating
system. Direct contact between the packaging material and the food product is not nec-
essary for effective antimicrobial activity in a migrating system. However, it is crucial for
antimicrobial activity efficacy in a nonmigrating system [57,92]. However, both primarily
serve to protect food from microbial deterioration and spoilage. The mechanism of action
of antimicrobial agents integrated into packaging materials is determined by the controlled
and delayed release of the agent onto food surfaces. This is essential to maintain a suitable
concentration of the agent in the food and effectively suppress microbial development
Processes 2023, during theREVIEW
10, x FOR PEER food product’s shelf life [46,57,93,94]. 7 of 32

Figure 2 illustrates an antimicrobial system and the relative behavior of active substances.

Figure 2. Antimicrobial
Figure 2. Antimicrobial packagingpackaging system(adapted
system (adapted from Jideani
from and Vogtand
Jideani (2016)Vogt
[22] and Han [22] and Han
(2016)
(2003) [91]).
(2003) [91]).
In Figures 2A,B, antimicrobial agents are released through diffusion between the
packaging material and the food and partitioning at the interface. The inclusion of the
antimicrobial agent into the packaging material is chemically bonded via immobilization
(Figure 2A). In Figure 2A, the antimicrobial agent is incorporated into the packaging ma-
terial. To regulate the release rate, particularly in the two-layer system (Figure 2B), the
antimicrobial agent (outer layer) is coated on the packaging material (inner layer), or the
antimicrobial matrix layer (outer layer) is laminated with the control layer (inner layer).
Figure 2C depicts a headspace system. Here, the volatile antimicrobial agent initially in-
Processes 2023, 11, 590 7 of 30

In Figure 2A,B, antimicrobial agents are released through diffusion between the pack-
aging material and the food and partitioning at the interface. The inclusion of the antimicro-
bial agent into the packaging material is chemically bonded via immobilization (Figure 2A).
In Figure 2A, the antimicrobial agent is incorporated into the packaging material. To
regulate the release rate, particularly in the two-layer system (Figure 2B), the antimicrobial
agent (outer layer) is coated on the packaging material (inner layer), or the antimicrobial
matrix layer (outer layer) is laminated with the control layer (inner layer). Figure 2C
depicts a headspace system. Here, the volatile antimicrobial agent initially integrated
into the matrix layer is released into the headspace. Equilibrated sorption/isotherm is
used to partition the headspace antimicrobial agent from the food product. A headspace
system with a control layer is shown in Figure 2D. The control layer precisely regulates
the permeability of the volatile antimicrobial agent and maintains a specific headspace
concentration [91,92]. Figure 2C,D show that the antimicrobial agent’s volatility permits it
to reach the gaseous-phase particle’s headspace to contact the food product.

5. Types of Antimicrobial Packaging Systems

Antimicrobial packaging can take many forms, including sachets/pads containing
volatile antimicrobial agents; polymers containing volatile and nonvolatile antimicrobial
agents; antimicrobial coats on polymer surfaces; ionic or covalent linkages between an-
timicrobials and polymers due to immobilization techniques; and inherently antimicrobial
polymers [43].

5.1. Sachets or Pads Containing Volatile Antimicrobial Agents inside Packages

Sachets or pouches and pads that are sealed loose or affixed to the interior of a
container have been the most effective commercial application of antimicrobial packaging
and have played a significant role in food preservation [82,95–97]. They are described
as pads containing volatile antimicrobial agents inserted inside the food environment to
allow the antimicrobial to gradually release and interact with the headspace in the package,
inhibiting the microbial growth of the food product’s surface [42]. The gradual release
of the active agent is propelled by the moisture concentration inside the package [42].
There are two techniques for producing antimicrobial-releasing sachets: sachets that create
antimicrobial compounds in situ and release them, and sachets that transport and release
antimicrobials [96]. Oxygen scavengers, moisture absorbers, carbon dioxide scavengers
and generators, ethanol and chlorine dioxide generators are the most common commercial
applications. These commercially available systems for food applications are summarized
by Suppakul et al. [16] and Han et al. [19].
Oxygen scavengers are used primarily in meat, bakery, dairy, pasta, and produce pack-
aging to prevent oxidation, microbial growth, and spoilage reactions in foods [24,97,98].
Moisture absorbers inhibit microbial growth by lowering water activity and are mainly
used in foods such as cheeses, meats, chips, nuts, gums, and spices [99]. The most com-
mon moisture absorber is silica gel because it remains dry and free-flowing even when
saturated [30].
Typically, microbial growth is suppressed by the presence of carbon dioxide in a pack-
aging system. Carbon dioxide generators are used in packaging for fresh produce, where
an increased concentration of CO2 coupled with decreased O2 concentration slows the res-
piration rate, extending the product’s shelf life [30]. They are also considered antimicrobials
because of their inhibitory activity against a range of aerobic bacteria and fungi [97]. Carbon
dioxide generators are commonly used in meat and poultry packaging [30,100,101]. Excess
CO2 concentration in a package for some CO2 -producing foods may result in the high-level
dissolution of CO2 into the food. Consequently, increasing the package’s pressure (or
volume) due to low CO2 permeation leads to undesirable changes in product quality in
terms of texture and flavor and package collapse [16,19,102]. To avoid this adverse effect,
CO2 absorbers may be used to prevent package rupture, particularly during storage [97].
Processes 2023, 11, 590 8 of 30

The antimicrobial properties of ethanol are widely known. Ethanol generators reduce
the rate of staling and oxidative changes in foods such as cheeses, bread, and bakery prod-
ucts as well as the incidence of microbial deterioration [16]. Encapsulated ethanol sachets
emit their vapor into the package headspace, maintaining the preservation effect [103,104].
However, one disadvantage is the typical off-flavor of ethanol. Ethanol generators ef-
fectively control about ten species of mold, including Aspergillus and Penicillium species,
different species of bacteria, including Salmonella, Staphylococcus, and E. coli, as well as
species of spoilage yeast [105].
Chlorine dioxide (ClO2 ) is a powerful oxidizing and sanitizing agent used in gaseous or
aqueous forms to wash fresh produce to keep them safe from bacterial contamination [106,107].
The effectiveness of chlorine dioxide generators in controlling pathogenic and spoilage mi-
croorganisms, thereby increasing food product shelf life, was reported by [108]. Ray et al.
(2013) developed a chlorine dioxide (ClO2 )-releasing packaging for fresh produce decontami-
nation. The authors found that the released ClO2 reduced Salmonella spp. and E. coli O157:H7
inoculated on the tomatoes to undetectable levels [109].
While sachets, pouches, and pads have several benefits, they have a few drawbacks.
Because sachets and pads are often placed in each package manually, packaging time
is increased, thereby limiting productivity [95,110]. Another drawback is the inability
to use them in liquid foods. Liquids touching the sachet material may cause leakage
of its contents. Another disadvantage is consumer acceptability. Loose sachets may be
mistaken for food, posing a concern due to the risk of disintegration, contamination, and
unintentional consumption [95].

5.2. Polymers with Intrinsic Antimicrobial Properties

Chitosan and poly(ε-lysine) have been the only natural polymers with inherent an-
timicrobial characteristics [111,112]. These polymers are made of polycations, which can
kill microorganisms by acting on their negatively charged cell membranes [113]. That is,
they inhibit microbial growth by causing leakage of intracellular constituents of microbial
cells [15]. Using bioactive polymers, such as chitosan, has intrinsic antimicrobial action in
composites or coatings [10,114,115]. Chitosan is the world’s second most prevalent natural
polymer after cellulose. It is a promising material owing to its outstanding biodegradability,
biocompatibility, antimicrobial activity, non-toxicity, film-forming properties, and economic
benefits [114,116–118]. The use of chitosan-based films, coatings, and treatments applied to
the food package inherently possesses antimicrobial properties and has resulted in the ex-
tension of the shelf life of a wide food range, including fresh produce, meat products, bread,
and dairy products [15,116]. Chitosan’s antimicrobial activity is primarily influenced by its
molecular weight (MW) and degree of deacetylation (DD), among other physicochemical
parameters [116,119].
Current chitosan film production processes include direct casting, coating, layer-by-
layer assembly, and extrusion. The procedures may be employed for either pure chitosan
films or chitosan films mixed with other polymers. Priyadarshi and Rhim [120] presented a
comprehensive review of these methods. To enhance the applicability and functionality
of chitosan in films and coatings as a food packaging material, it has to be combined with
some other biopolymers [120,121]. Polysaccharides, proteins, extracts, and organic acids are
examples of these biopolymers. It has also been demonstrated that incorporating nanopar-
ticles into chitosan-based food packaging inhibits the growth of spoilage and pathogenic
bacteria, improves food quality and safety, and extends food shelf life [116]. Because of
its noble nature, silver is the most utilized nanoparticle. Silver nanoparticles (AgNPs)
have antibacterial, antifungal, anti-yeast, and anti-viral properties and may be coupled
with non-degradable and edible polymers for active food packaging [122,123]. Chitosan
and silver nanoparticles could be homogeneously distributed in a polymer matrix via a
green chemistry methodology [114]. Zinc oxide (ZnO) is another essential nanomaterial
widely considered safe and utilized as a food additive [124]. They can be incorporated into
Processes 2023, 11, 590 9 of 30

polymeric matrices to provide antimicrobial activity and improve packaging qualities [125].
Table 2 highlights examples of chitosan films enhanced with polymers and nanomaterials.
Table 2. Some examples of studies with chitosan film enhanced with polymers and nanomaterials.

Packaging Material
(Chitosan + Polymer, Target Microorganism Antimicrobial Functionality Reference
Chitosan + Nanomaterial)
Chitosan + Gallic acid Two Gram-negative bacteria: E. coli and Gallic acid significantly increased the [126]
Salmonella typhimurium, and two antimicrobial activities of chitosan films
Gram-positive bacteria: Bacillus subtilis
and Listeria innocua
Chitosan + Maqui berry L. innocua, Serratia marcescens, Pure chitosan film effective against only [127]
(MB) extracts Aeromonas hydrophila, S. putrefaciens and P. fluorescens
Achromobacter denitrificans, Chitosan with MB films were effective
Alcaligenes faecalis, Pseudomonas against all the bacteria except L. innocua
fluorescens, Citrobacter freundii and
Shewanella putrefaciens
Chitosan film + Propolis Gram-positive bacteria (S. aureus) and Chitosan alone did not show any [128]
extract (PE) Gram-negative bacteria (E. coli, inhibition against tested bacteria
Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Antimicrobial activity was evident for
and Salmonella Enteritidis) chitosan + PE
Chitosan + Rosemary Listeria monocytogenes, Pseudomonas Notable inhibitory activity [129]
essential oil (REO) putida, Streptococcus agalactiae, E. coli, on microorganisms
and Lactococcus lactis
Chitosan + Glycerol E. coli, S. aureus and A. niger High content of chitosan film had [130]
antimicrobial properties compared with
a low chitosan content film
Chitosan film with increasing glycerol
had no bacteriostatic effect
Chitosan + Peptide E. coli and B. subtilis All developed films exhibited [131]
antibacterial activity
No significant improvement in
antibacterial activity with the addition
of soy or corn peptides
Chitosan + Squid Aspergillus parasiticus Fungistatic activity of the chitosan films [132]
gelatin hydrolysates (SGH) was not significantly improved with the
addition of 10% SGH
Fungistatic index increased by 34% by
adding 20% SGH
Chitosan + Olive leaf E. coli, L. monocytogenes, and Chitosan + OLE films have significant [133]
extract (OLE) Campylobacter jejuni subsp. jejuni antimicrobial activity against
L. monocytogenes and C. jejuni but are
not evident for E. Coli.
Chitosan + AgNPs or Zinc S. aureus, E. coli, Salmonella typhamrium, Developed chitosan nanocomposite [134]
oxide nanoparticles (ZnONPs) B. cereus, and Listeria monocyte. films showed high
antimicrobial activity
Chitosan + ZnONPs Gram-positive bacterium Twofold and 1.5-fold increment in the [135]
Bacillus subtilis (B. subtilis) and antimicrobial activity was observed for
Gram-negative bacterium (E. coli) B. subtilis and E. coli, respectively, with
increased ZnONPs concentration in the
films from 0(w/w) to 2%(w/w)
Chitosan + AgNPs Gram-positive bacteria: S. aureus and Developed film significantly inhibited [136]
pathogenic yeast: Candida albicans the growth of S. aureus and showed
(C. albicans) marked antifungal activity against
C. albican
Chitosan + ZnONPs + Gram-positive B. subtilis and Resultant film was efficient against the [137]
Gallic acid Gram-negative E. coli microorganisms and has a great
potential application for improving the
shelf life of food products
Processes 2023, 11, 590 10 of 30

Table 2. Cont.

Packaging Material
(Chitosan + Polymer, Target Microorganism Antimicrobial Functionality Reference
Chitosan + Nanomaterial)
Chitosan/pullulan (CS/PL) Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa), Developed film enhanced antioxidant [138]
nanocomposite films + clove S. aureus, and E. coli activity and showed strong
essential oil (CEO) loaded antibacterial activity against the
Chitosan-ZnO target microorganisms
hybrid nanoparticles
Chitosan/Zein films + P. aeruginosa, B. subtilis, E. coli Bacterial growth of S. aureus, B. subtilis [139]
Mosla chinensis EOs and S. aureus and E. coli was inhibited in both
nanoemulsions (NEs) and NPs EO-loaded NP and NE films.
Chitosan + polyvinyl alcohol E. coli, S. aureus, A. niger and C. albicans Nanocomposites films had good [140]
(PVA) + Fe2 O3 /TiO2 antibacterial activity
(FeTiO2 ) NPs
Chitosan + Guar gum + PVA + E. coli and S. aureus PVA and guar gum did not show any [141]
Moringa extract (ME) antibacterial activity
Incorporating ME enhanced the
antibacterial activity against S. aureus
and E. coli bacteria
Chitosan + turmeric essential Bacillus cereus TEO exhibited antioxidant and [142]
oil (TEO) + magnetic-silica antibacterial activities against
nanocomposites Bacillus cereus
Chitosan film incorporated with the
bionanocomposite had a stronger
antibacterial effect against B. cereus than
the chitosan film containing only TEO

Sun et al. [126] prepared chitosan film with different gallic acid concentrations. The
authors evaluated the developed films’ antimicrobial, mechanical, physical, and structural
properties. Antimicrobial activity was assessed against two Gram-negative bacteria, E. coli
and Salmonella typhimurium, as well as two Gram-positive bacteria, B. subtilis, and L. innocua.
Chitosan films infused with gallic acid considerably increased their antimicrobial properties,
and the films reduced microbial growth by 2.5-log reduction. In another recent investigation,
Li et al. [131] developed chitosan/peptide films by incorporating peptides (0.4%, w/v) from
soy, corn, and caseins into chitosan films. Peptides are protein fragments that exist as host
defense molecules in the innate immune systems of invertebrates and vertebrates with
unique functional activities (e.g., antimicrobial, antioxidant, antithrombotic) [143]. The
antibacterial activity of films was tested against E. coli and B. subtilis. Due to the presence
of chitosan, all the films demonstrated antimicrobial activity. The inclusion of soy or corn
peptides did not significantly increase the antibacterial activity of the films. However,
adding casein peptides increased the film’s antibacterial activity and inhibited the growth
of E. coli and B. subtilis.
Qin et al. [144] developed active packaging films by integrating AgNPs and anthocyanin-
rich purple corn extract (PCE) into chitosan. The chitosan/AgNPs/PCE film had the
best barrier, mechanical, antioxidant, and antimicrobial properties [144]. Enhanced an-
timicrobial activity was shown against four foodborne pathogenic bacteria strains (E coli,
S. aureus, Salmonella, and L. monocytogenes). Notably, the chitosan/AgNPs/PCE film’s
antimicrobial properties were the strongest, while the chitosan/PCE film had the lowest
antimicrobial properties. The enhanced activity could be related to AgNPs’ interaction
with membrane proteins, enzymes, and nucleic acids, leading to cell lysis and death [145],
and the presence of abundant anthocyanins in PCE [127,146]. Mohamed and Madian [136]
successfully developed chitosan films doped with silver nanoparticles. The authors showed
that incorporating silver nanoparticles into chitosan film significantly increased its mechan-
ical characteristics and antimicrobial activity. Compared with pure chitosan film, silver
nanoparticles doped with chitosan films showed significant antibacterial activity against
Processes 2023, 11, 590 11 of 30

S. aureus [136]. Yadav et al. [137] developed an active packaging film made of chitosan and
ZnONPs loaded with gallic acid (Ch-ZnO@gal) using the casting method. The antibacte-
rial activity of the films was evaluated against both bacterial strains, i.e., Gram-positive
B. subtilis and Gram-negative E. coli. The developed film possessed significant antibacterial
potential compared to pure chitosan film. The findings were related to the impact of reactive
oxygen species released by ZnONPs loaded with gallic acid and Zn2+ ions. They attack the
negatively charged cell wall, causing leakage and, eventually, bacterial death [147–149].

5.3. Antimicrobial Coating or Adsorption on Polymer Surfaces

Here, the packaging is coated with a matrix that acts as a carrier for the antimi-
crobial agent. Antimicrobials that cannot tolerate polymer processing temperatures or
heat-sensitive antimicrobials, such as volatile chemicals, are often coated onto the packag-
ing materials by the cast film method [15,43,47,150]. Because of the ease of the procedure,
coating has been the most preferred method of applying antimicrobial agents to poly-
mer surfaces. By definition, a coating is a “thin layer of material, generally thinner than
1 micron, applied onto a plastic or cellulose substrate,” which can improve adhesion be-
tween two layers, improve water and oxygen barrier qualities, or enhance surface attributes
such as wettability [46,47]. Conventional coatings, which are primarily composed of syn-
thetic polymers derived from petroleum, have predominated in the use of antimicrobial
food-packaging films. These include polyvinylidene chloride (PVDC), polyvinyl alco-
hol (PVOH), and ethylene vinyl alcohol (EVOH) [46]. Due to environmental concerns
over synthetic polymer-based packaging materials, there is a rising interest in edible film
coatings. Coatings made from edible biopolymers have improved biodegradable antimi-
crobial active packaging [29,151]. Furthermore, the choice of an antimicrobial polymeric
film is determined by the application’s intended use and, thus, by the qualities of the
polymeric films.
Before the application of antimicrobial agents, plastic films are frequently surface modi-
fied to improve the adhesion of antimicrobials to the polymer matrix [47]. The application is
achieved by UV radiation. Furthermore, several methods, such as microencapsulation and
the use of polymer nanocomposites, have been developed to include antimicrobial agents
in the coating to prevent further problems caused by heat and mechanical stress. According
to [46,152], an antimicrobial coating’s design necessitates a detailed knowledge of the inter-
actions between the active substance, coating, substrate, and food. Certain conditions must
be met before an antimicrobial coating may be employed in food packaging applications:
1. The active coating should adhere to the film substrate efficiently and be inert for direct
food contact;
2. The concentration of the released active agent should be controlled to ensure effective
antimicrobial action;
3. The final active coated structure should be suitable for the specific food product,
which implies that the produced material must have the same qualities as traditional
passive packaging.
Fungicides were mixed into waxes to coat fruits and vegetables, and shrink films
coated with quaternary ammonium salts were used to wrap potatoes in the early phases of
antimicrobial packaging development [15,29,153,154]. Typical plastic films and biopolymers
used in the development of antimicrobial-coated packaging include low-density polyethylene
(LDPE), linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE), polypropylene (PP), polyvinyl chloride
(PVC), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), and polylactic acid (PLA) [155]. Some instances
of antimicrobial-coated studies included chitosan/essential oil-coated polypropylene (PP)
films [156], chitosan/propolis-coated PP films [157], nisin-coated polyethylene films [158],
chitosan-coated polylactic acid (PLA) films containing multiple organic acids [159], zataria
multiflora essential oil (ZEO)-coated PP films [160], clove oil-coated LLDPE [161], cel-
lulose nanofibers (CNFs)/PLA coated with ethanolic extract of propolis [162], nisin-
coated polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) films [163], nisin-coated PLA film [164], PLA films coated
with clove oil/argan oil and chitosan [165], nanostructured aluminum-doped zinc oxide-
Processes 2023, 11, 590 12 of 30

coated PLA films [166], bacteriocins-coated polyethylene terephthalate (PET) films [167],
plantaricin BM-1 and chitosan-coated polyethylene terephthalate/polyvinylidene chlo-
ride/retort casting polypropylene (PPR) plastic [168], etc.

5.4. Direct Incorporation of Antimicrobial Agents into Polymers

Several antimicrobial agents can be integrated directly into the packaging material,
particularly films [97]. Antimicrobial film-forming materials are created by incorporating
antimicrobial agents into a polymer matrix, releasing them onto the food surface to interact
with microbes [42]. The rationale for incorporating antimicrobials into polymeric packaging
materials is to extend the shelf life of the packed foods by preserving the foods against
microbial spoilage and hazardous food-borne microorganisms as well as preventing surface
growth in foods where a large portion of spoilage and contamination occurs [42,169].
Antimicrobials such as bactericides, enzymes, chelators, metal ions, or organic acid can be
introduced into polymers during the melting process or by solvent compounding [43,59].
During the polymer/film processing, thermal polymer processing techniques such
as extrusion, co-extrusion, or injection molding can be employed for thermally stable
antimicrobials (e.g., silver substituted zeolites) in which they are included in the melt [43,97].
The solvent compounding method is more suitable for heat-sensitive antimicrobials such
as enzymes and volatile compounds. In this case, the antimicrobial and the polymer must
be soluble in the same solvent. Due to the great diversity of proteins, carbohydrates, and
lipids (which function as plasticizers) that generate films, biopolymers are an excellent
choice for this film formation process. These polymers and blends are soluble in water,
ethanol, and a wide range of antimicrobial-compatible solvents [43].
To achieve antimicrobial activity, the direct incorporation of antimicrobials into a
polymer matrix/system is a convenient method and results in different release profiles. For
instance, Rocha et al. [170] described the additive release of the antimicrobial agents as a
simple matrix diffusion process with degradation occurring after the active component
is released. Several factors influence the antimicrobial activity by the diffusion of antimi-
crobials from the film; these include the size, shape, polarity of the diffusing molecule,
degree of molecular crosslinking, and the chemical structure of the film [170]. It is worth
mentioning that the type of antimicrobial, its concentration, and target microorganism
affect the film’s antimicrobial activity. Table 3 shows some antimicrobials incorporated into
polymers that showed antimicrobial activity against some microorganisms.

Table 3. Summary of selected studies on antimicrobials incorporated into polymers.

Antimicrobials Polymer Target Microorganisms References

Potassium Starch film S. aureus, Candida spp., Salmonella spp. and [171]
sorbate Penicillium spp.
Starch–clay nanocomposite A. niger [172]
Linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE) Yeast [173]
Sorbic acid Polypropylene (PP)-based film E. coli, S. aureus and A. niger [162]
Polypropylene-based composite films E. coli, S. aureus and A. niger [174]
Starch-poly (butylene adipate E. coli, S. aureus, Salmonella Typhimurium, [175]
co-terephthalate) (PBAT) films Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Aeromonas
Hydrophyla, B. cereus and L. innocua
Nisin Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC), L. monocytogenes and S. aureus [176]
chitosan (CTS), sodium caseinate (SC), and
polylactic acid (PLA) films
Poly (butylene adipate-co-terephthalate) L. monocytogenes, S. aureus, Clostridium [177]
(PBAT) films perfringens, and B. cereus
Mater-Bi (MB)-based film L. monocytogenes, Salmonella enteritidis, [178]
E. coli, and S. aureus.
Processes 2023, 11, 590 13 of 30

Table 3. Cont.

Antimicrobials Polymer Target Microorganisms References

Poly(lactide) (PLA)/poly(butylene E. coli and L. monocytogenes [179]
adipate-co-terephthalate) (PBAT) blend films
Zinc oxide PLA-based nanocomposite films E. coli and L. monocytogenes [180]
nanoparticles
PLA-based films S. aureus, Bacillus atrophaeus, B. cereus, E. [181]
coli, and Candida albicans

5.5. Antimicrobial Immobilization of Polymers through Ion or Covalent Bonds

Another way to enhance the release of antimicrobial agents is to immobilize the agent
onto polymers. These polymers are appealing because they can be hydrolyzed to produce
harmless compounds that can be metabolized in vivo and the environment [46,47,182].
The presence of functional groups on both the polymer and the antimicrobial agents or
compound is required for immobilization, and ionic or covalent bonds are created between
the two [46]. Antimicrobial substances with the appropriate functional groups include
enzymes, peptides, organic acids, and polyamines. One of the most researched techniques
in food packaging is the immobilization of peptides and enzymes [182]. Polymers having
functional groups include ethylene vinyl acetate, ethylene methyl acrylate, ethylene acrylic
acid, ethylene methacrylic acid, ionomer, polystyrene, nylon, etc. [15]. Most polymeric
films used in food packaging have inert surfaces and low surface energy, resulting in
poor antimicrobial bonding ability. A surface activation phase is necessary to enhance the
polymer surface energy before antimicrobial immobilization, which can be accomplished
by either physical or chemical (wet) techniques [155].
Crosslinkers or spacer molecules that attach the polymer surface to the bioactive
agent are often essential for immobilization. Dextran, chitosan, ethylenediamine, and
polyethyleneimine are common macromolecules that can function as a spacer or crosslinker
in the film production process [155,183]. They can enhance the formation of covalent bonds
between the activated film and the antimicrobial compound while not being a part of the
bond. That is, spacer molecules provide motion flexibility, which aids in the interaction
of the active component of the antimicrobial agent with the microorganisms on the food
surface [15]. The active agents are typically designed and intended to be released into the
food or to function at the food product’s surface. However, the type of bonding, either
ionic or covalent, influences the release of these agents from immobilized polymers. While
ionic bonding allows for a gradual release of antimicrobial agents into the food, covalent
bonding allows for less concern about microbial agent diffusion [15]. It is vital to ensure
that there is no chemical migration from packaging materials to foods and that there is no
residual free chemical after the immobilization reaction.
Immobilization creates a stable binding between the active agent and the function-
alized polymer surface, allowing long-term activity. It ensures no bioactive substance
migrates into the food, providing a regulatory benefit [97]. However, close interaction with
food needs regulatory approval [97]. It is worth noting that immobilization may limit the
antimicrobial effectiveness of some antimicrobials, such as antimicrobial proteins/peptides,
due to structural changes and denaturation by solvents [15,43]. Various substrates are
used to retain and increase the action of polymer-immobilized agents, such as naringinase
immobilized in cellulose acetate films [15,155].
A recent study by [184] showed the covalent immobilization of antimicrobial polypropy-
lene (PP) film using -poly(lysine) (EPL). To create a reactive blend (PP/PP-g-MA), PP was
combined with polypropylene-graft-maleic anhydride (PP-g-MA). It was blended with
ε-poly(lysine) and styrene-maleic anhydride copolymer (SMA) to produce PP-SMA-EPL
antimicrobial film due to covalent attachment through the imide ring formation between
EPL, SMA, and PP/PP-g-MA. The resultant film showed effectiveness against E. coli and
L. innocua. In another recent investigation, Doshna et al. [185] used a reactive extrusion to
create active antimicrobial packaging utilizing polypropylene as the base polymer, polyly-
Processes 2023, 11, 590 14 of 30

sine as the immobilized antimicrobial, and dicumyl peroxide as the free radical initiator and
cross-linker. After 1 h of incubation at 37 ◦ C, the antimicrobial active packaging material
reduced P. aeruginosa by 1-log [185].

6. Antimicrobial Packaging Effectiveness/Applications

Antimicrobial packaging plays a critical role in inhibiting the development of targeted
microorganisms on foods while increasing food safety and extending shelf life without
compromising food quality. It is not intended to replace appropriate manufacturing and
handling methods but rather to provide an extra barrier for microorganisms to over-
come [92]. Antimicrobial packaging has been used in a variety of food products. This
section discusses the application of antimicrobial packaging.

6.1. Antimicrobial Packaging for Fresh and Minimally Processed Fruits and Vegetables
Fresh and minimally processed fruits and vegetables are perishable and easily com-
promised by postharvest physiological changes and microbial contamination throughout
postharvest transportation, processing, storage, and retail display [116,186]. Minimally pro-
cessed foods and vegetables, for instance, are extensively researched due to the difficulty in
retaining their fresh-like quality over lengthy periods, and the goal of minimally processed
products is to provide convenience and excellent quality [54]. Incorporating antimicrobial
agents into the packaging of fruits and vegetables could be a strategy for controlling the
effects of microorganisms, extending shelf life, and providing higher quality products. As
reported by Giannakourou and Tsironi [42] and Jung and Zhao [186], there are three forms
of antimicrobial packaging that have been documented for use on fresh and minimally
processed fruits and vegetables, namely:
1. Antimicrobial sachets: sachets containing volatile antimicrobial agents enclosed in
the packaging;
2. Antimicrobial films: the inclusion of volatile or nonvolatile antimicrobial chemicals
into packaging film composition;
3. Antimicrobial edible coatings: directly applying antimicrobial edible coatings or films
to the food surface.
Antimicrobial systems employ synthetic and natural active agents to inhibit microbial
development, as previously discussed. Essential oils (EO) and plant extracts, organic acids
and their salts, and chitosan are a few examples. Metals and metal oxides such as silver
(Ag) and zinc oxide (ZnO) have also demonstrated significant promise as antimicrobial
packaging agents to create more cost-effective and safe food packaging solutions for fruits
and vegetables [187]. Table 4 presents some examples of developed antimicrobial systems
to reduce microbial growth in fruit and vegetables.
Processes 2023, 11, 590 15 of 30

Table 4. Summary of examples of antimicrobial packaging systems utilized to reduce microbial growth in fruit and vegetables.

Antimicrobial System Fruit/Vegetable Products Target Microorganisms Findings References

Essential oil (EO) sachets Mango Colletotrichum gloeosporides, Lasiodiplodia theobromae, Presence of EOs did not affect the [188]
EOs: oregano and lemon grass EO Xanthomonas campestris pv. mangiferae indica and physicochemical attributes of the produce
Alternaria alternate Active sachets incorporated with EOs
reduced the growth of tested fungi
Lemongrass was more effective
Edible pectin film enriched with the Fresh-cut peach Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica serovar Developed film decreased bacteria growth [189]
essential oil from cinnamon leaves (CLO) Choleraesuis, L. monocytogenes, E. coli, and S. aureus Antibacterial-enriched pectin film performed
best at a CLO concentration of 36.1 g/L
Essential oil (EO) sachets Papaya Alternaria alternata, Fusarium semitectum, Reduction in the growth of [190]
EOs: oregano, cinnamon, Lasiodiplodia theobromae and Rhizopus stolonifer microorganisms was observed
and lemon grass EO Cinnamon sachet had the most significant
reduction in microorganisms
at the end of storage
Ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) blended Fresh-cut tomatoes E. coli (Gram-negative bacteria) and S. aureus Best performance was shown with blended [191]
with Low-density polyethylene (LDPE), (Gram-positive bacteria) film incorporated with CB
incorporating EOs Quality was preserved in blended films that
EOs: clove leaf oil incorporated EOs
(CL), sweet basil oil (SB) compared to films without EO
and cinnamon bark oil (CB)
Poly(lactic acid)–cellulose nanocrystals Mixed vegetables L. monocytogenes Strong antimicrobial potential of [192]
(PLA–CNC)–oregano films PLA–CNC–oregano films was evident
Polyamide incorporated with Cherry tomatoes Alternaria alternata, B. cinerea, Penicillium digitatum, Reduced decay development on various fresh [193]
carvacrol essential oil Lychee Penicillium expansum, and A. niger produce (cherry tomato, lychee, and grape)
Grapes packed in active bags
Developed film exhibited
excellent antifungal properties
Polyvinyl alcohol Fresh-cut lettuce Dickeya chrysanthemi, molds and yeasts (MY), and Texture and color were not affected [194]
encapsulated with oregano EO total mesophilic aerobic bacteria (MAB) Substantial growth inhibitory effects against
MY and total MAB
Polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) film incorporated Tomatoes Salmonella enterica, total molds and yeasts (MY), Quality of the packed produce was preserved [195]
with oregano essential oil and mesophilic aerobic bacteria (MAB)
Processes 2023, 11, 590 16 of 30

Table 4. Cont.

Antimicrobial System Fruit/Vegetable Products Target Microorganisms Findings References

Essential oil (EO) sachets Grapes Botrytis cinerea Chitosan/alginate beads emitting clove EO [196]
Chitosan/alginate beads containing maintained produce quality
EOs and vanillin
EOs: clove and lavender
Starch film incorporated with chitosan Cherry tomatoes B. cereus, S. aureus, E coli and CNP concentration influenced the [197]
nanoparticles (CNP) Salmonella typhimurium antimicrobial activity of the starch/CNP films
CNP suppressed Gram-positive bacteria
more effectively than Gram-negative bacteria
Extended shelf life of packed cherry tomatoes
in developed films
Low-density polyethylene (LDPE) with Strawberry Molds and yeasts (MY), and E. coli Nano-silver packages improved the storage [198]
silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) life and maintained fruit quality
Starch-based composite films Chillies E. coli, B. cereus, S. aureus, Salmonella typhimurium, Lemongrass essential oil was effective in [199]
incorporated with A. niger, Mucor ruber and Candida albicans microbial growth inhibition
lemongrass essential oil Developed film proved
efficient for chili preservation
Processes 2023, 11, 590 17 of 30

Espitia et al. [125] developed EO sachets to be utilized in an antimicrobial packaging

system. The authors tested the activities of incorporated oregano, cinnamon, and lemon-
grass EO in vitro against different phytopathogenic fungi, namely, Alternaria alternata,
Fusarium semitectum, Lasiodiplodia theobromae, and Rhizopus stolonifer. Furthermore, the study
assessed the sachet’s activity in terms of microbial growth on papaya fruit. Treated sachets
with EOs substantially reduced the growth of mesophilic aerobic bacteria, yeasts, and
mold. An antimicrobial packaging film based on polyamide with incorporated carvacrol
EO was developed by Shemesh et al. [193]. The antimicrobial activity of the resultant
polyamide films was tested against Alternaria alternata, Botrytis cinerea, Penicillium digitatum,
Penicillium expansum, and A. niger. The films were further used for packaging different
fresh produce: cherry tomatoes, lychee, and grapes, to investigate their fungicidal effects
on postharvest pathogens. The film demonstrated great antifungal activity against the
examined fungal molds and outstanding performance in suppressing decay and increasing
the shelf life of the products.
In another study by Kwon et al. [194], the authors studied the efficacy of polyvinyl
alcohol (PVA) film incorporated with oregano EO (OPVA) to inhibit the proliferation of
microorganisms in the storage of packed cherry tomatoes. OPVA films containing 2% and
3% OEO had antimicrobial effects on Salmonella enterica, molds and yeasts (MY), and
mesophilic aerobic bacteria (MAB), even after storage for 7 days. The film did not influence
the physical properties of the tomatoes, and the quality was preserved. A recent study by
Shapi’i et al. [197] developed an antimicrobial packaging system of starch film incorporated
with chitosan nanoparticles (CNP). The findings showed that 15 to 20% w/w starch/CNP
films could inhibit bacteria (B. cereus, S. aureus, E. coli, and Salmonella typhimurium) growth.
The in vivo investigation, i.e., microbial count in wrapped cherry tomatoes, showed that
starch/CNP film (15% w/w) was more effective in suppressing microbial development in
cherry tomatoes than pure starch films. According to Perdana et al. [199], starch/chitosan
film infused with lemongrass essential oil has a strong potential for limiting the growth of
microorganisms such as Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, yeast, and molds. The
produced film proved successful for chili preservation by limiting water loss and microbial
development and delaying ripening during storage.

6.2. Antimicrobial Packaging for Meat Products

Meat is an ideal product for the growth of spoilage microorganisms. Microbial growth
in packed meats promotes pathogen development and undesirable organoleptic changes
over time [64,200,201]. According to published research, red and white meat have a high
potential for bacterial development due to their high water activity [202,203]. As a result,
antimicrobial packaging is utilized to protect against spoilage microorganisms during meat
preservation by applying specific chemical agents/compounds (both in the packaging
material and/or in the packaging area). In meat products, the efficiency of antimicrobial
packaging can be determined by monitoring the appropriate microbial count or quality
parameters that are indirectly connected to microbial growth [204]. Since most antimicrobial
packaging applications rely on the active antimicrobial agents migrating from the package
matrix into the food, its migratory dynamics serve as a regulating factor for effective
microbial suppression [205]. Therefore, the technique to optimize antimicrobial packaging
is to target specific spoilage or pathogenic organisms with the active agent adapted to
its migratory kinetics [152,205]. Furthermore, reducing the impact of active antimicrobial
packaging on the visual and sensory qualities of the packed product to the consumer is
crucial for the appropriate use of antimicrobial packaging in meat [206].
Meat antimicrobial packaging solutions have evolved over the previous decade. Var-
ious film applications, such as chitosan-based films, biodegradable polysaccharide and
protein-based films containing active agents, and synthetic packaging films with antimi-
crobial agents, have been researched for antimicrobial activity and used to package meat
and meat products [87,207]. Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and polystyrene were the two most
common packaging materials used for meat packing (with the inclusion of antibacterial
Processes 2023, 11, 590 18 of 30

agents in films). However, studies have shown that they are unsuitable for meat products
and that recycling is challenging [47,208]. As a result, biodegradable polyurethane was
proposed as a meat packaging material. Natural biopolymers (chitosan), organic acids or
their related acid anhydrides, alcohols, bacteriocins (nisin and pediocin), chelators, and
enzymes (lysozyme), among others, are some of the types of antimicrobial agents suggested
and investigated for meat packaging problems [24,181]. Although the inclusion of lactic
acid bacteria (LAB) into biopolymer films is an intriguing novel approach [181], these
bacteria are resistant to CO2 , which is widely used in vacuum or modified atmosphere
packaging (MAP) [209]. Additionally, while exposing meat products to antimicrobial
agents such as essential oils have some influence on microbial development, the adverse
organoleptic effects of the intense odor caused by application to meat limit their use to a
certain extent [206].
Recent research provides new insights into the efficiency of antimicrobial compounds
and silver-containing packaging in preventing beef deterioration [210,211]. Some re-
searchers, however, have pointed out the drawbacks of employing silver to restrict an-
tibacterial packaging. As a result, the use of nanoparticle coating during the packaging
process of meat products, including antibacterial compounds as well as silver, was recom-
mended [85,212,213]. For instance, Soysal et al. [86] investigated the impact of antimicrobial
agents (nisin, chitosan, potassium sorbate (PS), or silver substituted zeolite (AgZeo)) incor-
porated into low-density polyethylene (LDPE) on the physicochemical and microbiological
quality of chicken drumsticks. The use of active bags resulted in a lower level of total
aerobic mesophilic bacteria (APC), total coliform, mold, and yeast count in chicken drum-
sticks. The chitosan-containing film was the most successful in extending the shelf life and
improving the quality of the drumsticks. At 5 ◦ C for 6 days, the active bags reduced APC
and total coliform in the order chitosan > nisin > AgZeo > PS, while mold and yeasts were
reduced in the sequence chitosan > PS > nisin > AgZeo > PS.
Overall, the meat products’ packaging methods depend on the reaction of the used
materials and the antimicrobial agents. Table 5 summarizes the use of antimicrobial agents
in packaging various meat products and the objective of the previous investigations.
Table 5. Antimicrobial packaging and its application for meat products.

Antimicrobial Agent Product Aim References

Lysozyme Pork Determination of the antibacterial properties of [82]
the composite mats and the
product’s lysozyme activity
Nisin Chicken drumsticks Evaluating the effectiveness of several [85]
Chitosan antimicrobial agents on the product’s
Potassium sorbate microbiological characteristics
Silver substituted zeolite (AgZeo)
N-α-lauroyl-l-arginine ethyl ester Chicken fillets Evaluate the efficacy of antimicrobial [87]
monohydrochloride (LAE) starch-gelatin films containing LAE
Nano-encapsulated Satureja khuzestanica Lamb meat Assessment of chitosan [214]
essential oils (SKEO) coatings incorporated with SKEO
Mentha piperita EO (MPO) Ground beef Produce active PLA films incorporated with [204]
Bunium percicum EO (BPO) different concentrations of BPO, MPO, and
nanocellulose (NC), cellulose nanofibers
Assess antibacterial and
sensory effects on ground beef
Encapsulated cumin Beef hamburger Studying the impact of active paper on the [90]
microbiological and physical
qualities of beef hamburger
Nanochitosan Lamb meat Evaluated the effects on the chemical, microbial, [215]
Polylophium involucratum essential oil (PEO) and sensory characteristics of minced lamb
Garlic EO (GEO) Sausages Develop active edible films (based on whey [216]
protein (WP) or chitosan (CH)) incorporated
with GEO or nanoencapsulated GEO (NGEO)
Assess antimicrobial effects in packed sausages
Gelatin/palm wax/lemongrass Ground beef Determine the effectiveness of the GPL-coated [217]
essential oil (GPL) Kraft paper in maintaining
the quality of ground beef
Processes 2023, 11, 590 19 of 30

6.3. Antimicrobial Packaging for Dairy Products

Although dairy products are rich in nutrients, including high-quality proteins, miner-
als, vitamins, and energy-containing fats [218], they also provide a suitable environment for
the growth of a wide range of microbes [218,219]. Pathogenic microorganisms pose a health
risk to customers [219]. Packaging plays an essential role in protecting dairy products
after production. It is capable of effectively extending the shelf life of these products [220].
Antimicrobial packaging has shown great promise in improving microbiological safety
and preserving dairy products. Among the several dairy products, antimicrobial agents
in cheese packaging have received much attention [221]. These enhanced packaging can
provide excellent microbiological control and higher food safety requirements. Among
these are edible films and coatings. Table 6 shows brief studies on antimicrobial packaging
systems applicable to cheese.

Table 6. Examples of antimicrobial packaging applicable to cheese.

Cheese Types Description References

Saloio cheese Whey protein isolate coating as a carrier of lactic acid, [50]
natamycin, or chitooligosaccharides
Edible coating containing natamycin and
lactic acid was selected as the best option for cheese
Kashar cheese Zein and zein–wax coating with lysozyme, catechin, and gallic acid. [222]
Lysozyme-based film prevented the growth of L. monocytogens
Cheddar cheese Low-density polyethylene (LDPE) and cellulose films coated [223]
with peptide of Bacillus licheniformis Me1
Proven biopreservative efficiency of the activated
films in limiting pathogen development
Mozzarella cheese Sachets from microcellular foam starch containing rosemary oil and thyme oil [224]
Volatile oils also showed inhibitory effects on the growth of lactic acid bacteria (LAB)
and total aerobic bacteria (TAB).
Minas Frescal cheese Starch/halloysite/nisin nanocomposite films [225]
Inhibited L. monocytogenes, S. aureus, and Clostridium perfringens
Excellent barrier for preventing cheese contamination
Feta cheese Zein-based edible films incorporated with Zataria multiflora boiss essential oil (EO) [226]
Inclusion of EO reduced the count of viable Salmonella enteritidis, L. monocytogenes,
E. coli, and S. aureus
Ultra-filtrated (UF) cheese Organoclay nanoparticles incorporated into LDPE films [227]
Developed packaging able to maintain UF cheese quality without toxicity
Ultra-filtrated (UF) cheese LDPE films incorporated with silver (Ag), copper oxide (CuO), [228]
and zinc oxide (ZnO) nanoparticles
Optimum antibacterial effect with LDPE films
containing Cu-ZnO and with no Ag nanoparticles
Mozzarella cheese Cellulose acetate films incorporated with pink pepper EO [229]
Films reduced the microbiological growth in cheese
Yunnan cottage cheese Poly(lactic acid) (PLA) film incorporated with titanium [230]
dioxide (TiO2 ) or Ag nanoparticles
Prolonged cheese shelf life
Ultra-filtrated (UF) cheese Cellulosic paper coated with chitosan-zinc oxide nanocomposite containing nisin [231]
Presence of L. monocytogenes in cheese was significantly
reduced by nisin-containing films
Ultrafiltered white cheese Cellulose–chitosan (CC) films containing monolaurin (ML) [232]
0.5 and 1% ML into CC films reduced L. monocytogenes on cheese by 2.4–2.3 log
Processes 2023, 11, 590 20 of 30

Table 6. Cont.

Cheese Types Description References

Kashar cheese Alginate and zein films containing natamycin [233]
Natamycin concentration increased the antifungal activities of the films
Sliced cheddar cheese Starch films containing sodium benzoate (ASF-SB), [234]
citric acid (ASF-CA), and both (ASF-CASB)
Effective in reducing L. innocua on cheddar cheese surface
Telemea cheese Alginate films with silver nanoparticles and lemongrass EO [235]
Films exhibited strong antibacterial activity against B. cereus, S. aureus,
E. coli, and Salmonella Typhi
Mozzarella cheese Polyethylene (PE) films containing linalool or thymol [236]
Increase in the concentration of active agents increased the antimicrobial activities of
the films against E. coli, S. aureus, L. innocua, and Saccharomyces cervicea
Increased shelf life of cheese

To elaborate on a few studies, Fajardo et al. [237] demonstrated that chitosan–natamycin

film improved the storability and extended the shelf life of Saloio cheese packaging [237].
Incoronato et al. [238] investigated the deterioration of Fior di Latte cheese quality using
antimicrobial packaging containing silver nanoparticles. It was discovered that the devel-
oped active package limited the growth of spoilage bacteria without altering the product’s
functional dairy microbiota or sensory properties [238]. Otero et al. [239] tested the antimi-
crobial activity of two packaging films: polypropylene (PP) and polyethylene terephthalate
(PET), coated with different concentrations of essential oil from Origanum vulgare (OR) and
Ethyl Lauroyl Arginate HCl (LAE) against two strains of E. coli. Zamorano sheep cheese
was packaged with the films, and results showed that PET films coated with ≥6% LAE
concentrations had the greatest potential to reduce E. coli in the product [239].
Adding cinnamon bark oil (CBO) as an active ingredient produced an antibacterial film
from chicken bone gelatine (CBG). The films’ antimicrobial activity against L. monocytogenes
and E. coli was examined, and the films were utilized for packaging mozzarella cheese
to study their capacity to prevent microbiological deterioration. Results showed that
the antimicrobial of the CBG film is a function of the CBO concentration. Furthermore,
the microbial population was reduced during storage when the produced film was used
for packaging mozzarella cheese inoculated with L. monocytogenes. Küçük et al. [233]
developed alginate and zein films with natamycin as an antifungal agent to limit/prevent
mold formation on the surface of kashar cheeses. At the end of the storage period, zein
films with high natamycin concentrations demonstrated greater antifungal efficacy against
A. niger and Penicillium camembert. In a recent investigation, Motelica et al. [235] produced
alginate-based films infused with silver nanoparticles and lemongrass essential oil for
cheese packaging. The antimicrobial agents (silver nanoparticles and lemongrass essential
oil) interacted synergistically. The films developed demonstrated strong antibacterial
activity against two Gram-positive strains (B. cereus and S. aureus) and two Gram-negative
strains (E. coli and Salmonella Typhi) with the greatest results achieved against B. cereus.
Films could preserve and extend the shelf life of the packed cheese for up to 14 days.

7. Antimicrobial Packaging Regulatory Status

Over the last decade, technological advancements have been made in packaging food
and agricultural products to prevent microbial degradation. The relevance of antimicro-
bial packaging regulatory status leads to improved antimicrobial system efficacy. Despite
extensive studies into the benefits of antimicrobial packaging, several concerns remain con-
tentious, such as controlling the release of antimicrobial agents into packaging, preserving
the quality (physical and mechanical qualities) of packaging, and ensuring food safety [221].
As a result, assessing the potential hazards from oral exposure to these components that
may migrate into food must be made to protect the consumer [24]. Antimicrobial active
systems should be used following the standards of several regulatory authorities, such as
the Food and Drug Administration (USA), the European Food Safety Authority (European
Processes 2023, 11, 590 21 of 30

Union), and others. They establish the legal foundation for their correct use, safety, and mar-
keting [7,27]. The active (antimicrobial) compound and the inert carrier are the two primary
components of an active antimicrobial system. Active agents being purposely released
from the packaging system into the food would fall under food additives. Hence, they
must meet specific scientific and technological standards, while the carrier must fulfil the
safety criteria for food contact materials [240]. Often, standards for food contact materials
are stringent to avoid the migration of undesired components into the food. Understanding
appropriate regulatory choices, as well as environmental sustainability problems, would
aid commercialization efforts. Finally, consumer acceptability and purchase intent boost
the adoption of innovative packaging technologies, notably antimicrobial active packaging.

8. Conclusions
The technology of antimicrobial packaging is rapidly evolving. This method employs
antimicrobial agents or substances in a polymer matrix to reduce the growth of spoilage
food pathogens by targeting specific microorganisms to extend food shelf life. A thorough
understanding of antimicrobial packaging enables researchers and food industries to
develop appropriate methods for reducing microbial risks and improving food quality.
This review provided a comprehensive basic concept of antimicrobial packaging technology
and a summary of recent studies on antimicrobial packaging to extend the shelf life of
food products, emphasizing fresh and minimally processed fruits and vegetables, meat,
and dairy products. Although potent in reducing the growth of microbes in food, the
effectiveness and synergistic effects of antimicrobial packaging can be improved when
combined with other preservation hurdles, which may be dependent on the spoilage
properties, required shelf life, and consumer preferences. However, some issues exist,
including recycling management, reasonable prices for producers and consumers, and the
complexity of the production process are challenges for scientists and researchers. The
shelf life and safety of fresh fruits, vegetables, dairy, and meat products can be enhanced
by adjusting the level of active agents in the packages. Additionally, an inspection of the
diffusion rate of the antimicrobial agents from the film and their subsequent effectiveness
on food products from the chemical view is still debatable. For this reason, establishing
a multidisciplinary approach is imperative based on the scientific work of researchers
and scholars. Furthermore, increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of antimicrobial
packaging necessitates the identification of more natural antimicrobial compounds that are
effective in improving their stability in packaging systems and ensuring the safety of their
commercial applications. Similarly, for any application, selecting the best antimicrobial
packaging systems for a given product is essential. The selection can be determined by the
nature of the produce, storage conditions, required shelf life, and regulatory requirements.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, T.F. and M.R.; methodology, T.F. and M.R.; writing—original
draft preparation, T.F. and M.R.; writing—review and editing, T.F., M.R., S.A.I. and M.O.D.; funding ac-
quisition, S.A.I. and M.O.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This work is funded by the Department of Chemical Engineering of the University of
Pretoria and Faculty of Engineering, the Built Environment and Information Technology, Pretoria,
South Africa. The corresponding author – Samuel A. Iwarere is funded by the Government of the
United Kingdom through The Royal Society as a FLAIR Fellow [FLR\R1\201683].
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Ambaw, A.; Fadiji, T.; Opara, U.L. Thermo-Mechanical Analysis in the Fresh Fruit Cold Chain: A Review on Recent Advances.
Foods 2021, 10, 1357. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Brockgreitens, J.; Abbas, A. Responsive food packaging: Recent progress and technological prospects. Compr. Rev. Food Sci.
Food Saf. 2016, 15, 3–15. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Processes 2023, 11, 590 22 of 30

3. Han, J.H.; Patel, D.; Kim, J.E.; Min, S.C. Retardation of Listeria monocytogenes growth in mozzarella cheese using antimicrobial
sachets containing rosemary oil and thyme oil. J. Food Sci. 2014, 79, E2272–E2278. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Fadiji, T.; Berry, T.M.; Coetzee, C.J.; Opara, U.L. Mechanical design and performance testing of corrugated paperboard packaging
for the postharvest handling of horticultural produce. Biosyst. Eng. 2018, 171, 220–244. [CrossRef]
5. Samanta, K.K.; Basak, S.; Chattopadhyay, S.K. Potentials of fibrous and nonfibrous materials in biodegradable packaging.
In Environmental Footprints of Packaging; Springer: Singapore, 2016; pp. 75–113.
6. Mangaraj, S.; Yadav, A.; Bal, L.M.; Dash, S.K.; Mahanti, N.K. Application of biodegradable polymers in food packaging industry:
A comprehensive review. J. Packag. Technol. Res. 2019, 3, 77–96. [CrossRef]
7. Restuccia, D.; Spizzirri, U.G.; Parisi, O.I.; Cirillo, G.; Curcio, M.; Iemma, F.; Picci, N. New EU regulation aspects and global market
of active and intelligent packaging for food industry applications. Food Control 2010, 21, 1425–1435. [CrossRef]
8. Marsh, K.; Bugusu, B. Food packaging—Roles, materials, and environmental issues. J. Food Sci. 2007, 72, R39–R55. [CrossRef]
9. Farber, J.M. Microbiological aspects of modified-atmosphere packaging technology-a review. J. Food Prot. 1991, 54, 58–70.
[CrossRef]
10. Vasile, C.; Baican, M. Progresses in food packaging, food quality, and safety—Controlled-release antioxidant and/or antimicrobial
packaging. Molecules 2021, 26, 1263. [CrossRef]
11. Opara, U.L.; Fadiji, T. Compression damage susceptibility of apple fruit packed inside ventilated corrugated paperboard package.
Sci. Hortic. 2018, 227, 154–161. [CrossRef]
12. Defraeye, T.; Cronje, P.; Berry, T.; Opara, U.L.; East, A.; Hertog, M.; Verboven, P.; Nicolai, B. Towards integrated performance
evaluation of future packaging for fresh produce in the cold chain. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 44, 201–225. [CrossRef]
13. Pathare, P.B.; Opara, U.L. Structural design of corrugated boxes for horticultural produce: A review. Biosyst. Eng. 2014, 125, 128–140.
[CrossRef]
14. Ju, J.; Chen, X.; Xie, Y.; Yu, H.; Guo, Y.; Cheng, Y.; Yao, W. Application of essential oil as a sustained release preparation in food
packaging. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 92, 22–32. [CrossRef]
15. Sofi, S.A.; Singh, J.; Rafiq, S.; Ashraf, U.; Dar, B.N.; Nayik, G.A. A comprehensive review on antimicrobial packaging and its use
in food packaging. Curr. Nutr. Food Sci. 2018, 14, 305–312. [CrossRef]
16. Suppakul, P.; Miltz, J.; Sonneveld, K.; Bigger, S.W. Active packaging technologies with an emphasis on antimicrobial packaging
and its applications. J. Food Sci. 2003, 68, 408–420. [CrossRef]
17. Yousuf, B.; Qadri, O.S.; Srivastava, A.K. Antimicrobial packaging: Basic concepts and applications in fresh and fresh-cut fruits
and vegetables. In Innovative Packaging of Fruits and Vegetables: Strategies for Safety and Quality Maintenance; Apple Academic Press
Inc.: Oakville, ON, Canada, 2018; pp. 136–155.
18. La Storia, A.; Ferrocino, I.; Torrieri, E.; Di Monaco, R.; Mauriello, G.; Villani, F.; Ercolini, D. A combination of modified
atmosphere and antimicrobial packaging to extend the shelf-life of beefsteaks stored at chill temperature. Int. J. Food Microbiol.
2012, 158, 186–194. [CrossRef]
19. Han, J.W.; Ruiz-Garcia, L.; Qian, J.P.; Yang, X.T. Food packaging: A comprehensive review and future trends. Compr. Rev. Food Sci.
Food Saf. 2018, 17, 860–877. [CrossRef]
20. Anwar, R.W.; Warsiki, E. The comparison of antimicrobial packaging properties with different applications incorporation method
of active material. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2018, 141, 012002. [CrossRef]
21. Kumar, K.V.P.; Suneetha, J.; Kumari, B.A. Active packaging systems in food packaging for enhanced shelf life. J. Pharmacogn.
Phytochem. 2018, 7, 2044–2046.
22. Jideani, V.A.; Vogt, K. Antimicrobial packaging for extending the shelf life of bread—A review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2016, 56, 1313–1324.
[CrossRef]
23. Prasad, P.; Kochhar, A. Active packaging in food industry: A review. J. Environ. Sci. Toxicol. Food Technol. 2014, 8, 1–7. [CrossRef]
24. Quintavalla, S.; Vicini, L. Antimicrobial food packaging in meat industry. Meat Sci. 2002, 62, 373–380. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
25. Yildirim, S.; Röcker, B.; Pettersen, M.K.; Nilsen-Nygaard, J.; Ayhan, Z.; Rutkaite, R.; Radusin, T.; Suminska, P.; Marcos, B.;
Coma, V. Active packaging applications for food. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2018, 17, 165–199. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
26. European Commission. Commission Regulation (EC) No 450/2009 of 29 May 2009 on active and intelligent materials and articles
intended to come into contact with food. Off. J. Eur. Union 2009, 135, 1–11.
27. Vilela, C.; Kurek, M.; Hayouka, Z.; Röcker, B.; Yildirim, S.; Antunes, M.D.C.; Freire, C.S. A concise guide to active agents for active
food packaging. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 80, 212–222. [CrossRef]
28. Bastarrachea, L.J.; Wong, D.E.; Roman, M.J.; Lin, Z.; Goddard, J.M. Active packaging coatings. Coatings 2015, 5, 771–791.
[CrossRef]
29. Malhotra, B.; Keshwani, A.; Kharkwal, H. Antimicrobial food packaging: Potential and pitfalls. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6, 611.
[CrossRef]
30. Bhardwaj, A.; Alam, T.; Talwar, N. Recent advances in active packaging of agri-food products: A review. J. Postharvest Technol.
2019, 7, 33–62.
31. Pérez-Santaescolástica, C.; Munekata, P.E.; Feng, X.; Liu, Y.; Bastianello Campagnol, P.C.; Lorenzo, J.M. Active edible coatings and
films with Mediterranean herbs to improve food shelf-life. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2022, 62, 2391–2403. [CrossRef]
32. Mellinas, C.; Valdés, A.; Ramos, M.; Burgos, N.; Garrigos, M.D.C.; Jiménez, A. Active edible films: Current state and future trends.
J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2016, 133. [CrossRef]
Processes 2023, 11, 590 23 of 30

33. Li, M.; Ye, R. Edible active packaging for food application: Materials and technology. In Biopackaging; Masuelli, M.A., Ed.; Taylor
& Francis Group, LLC.: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2017; pp. 1–19.
34. Sanches-Silva, A.; Costa, D.; Albuquerque, T.G.; Buonocore, G.G.; Ramos, F.; Castilho, M.C.; Costa, H.S. Trends in the use of
natural antioxidants in active food packaging: A review. Food Addit. Contam. Part A 2014, 31, 374–395. [CrossRef]
35. Majid, I.; Nayik, G.A.; Dar, S.M.; Nanda, V. Novel food packaging technologies: Innovations and future prospective. J. Saudi Soc.
Agric. Sci. 2018, 17, 454–462. [CrossRef]
36. Ahmed, I.; Lin, H.; Zou, L.; Brody, A.L.; Li, Z.; Qazi, I.M.; Lv, L. A comprehensive review on the application of active packaging
technologies to muscle foods. Food Control 2017, 82, 163–178. [CrossRef]
37. Domínguez, R.; Barba, F.J.; Gómez, B.; Putnik, P.; Kovačević, D.B.; Pateiro, M.; Lorenzo, J.M. Active packaging films with natural
antioxidants to be used in meat industry: A review. Food Res. Int. 2018, 113, 93–101. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
38. Qian, M.; Liu, D.; Zhang, X.; Yin, Z.; Ismail, B.B.; Ye, X.; Guo, M. A review of active packaging in bakery products: Applications
and future trends. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 114, 459–471. [CrossRef]
39. Huang, J.; Hu, Z.; Hu, L.; Li, G.; Yao, Q.; Hu, Y. Pectin-based active packaging: A critical review on preparation, physical
properties and novel application in food preservation. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 118, 167–178. [CrossRef]
40. Dhanasekar, M.; Jenefer, V.; Nambiar, R.B.; Babu, S.G.; Selvam, S.P.; Neppolian, B.; Bhat, S.V. Ambient light antimicrobial activity
of reduced graphene oxide supported metal doped TiO2 nanoparticles and their PVA based polymer nanocomposite films.
Mater. Res. Bull. 2018, 97, 238–243. [CrossRef]
41. Mangalassary, S. Antimicrobial food packaging to enhance food safety: Current developments and future challenges. Food Process. Technol.
2012, 3, 100. [CrossRef]
42. Giannakourou, M.C.; Tsironi, T.N. Application of Processing and Packaging Hurdles for Fresh-Cut Fruits and Vegetables
Preservation. Foods 2021, 10, 830. [CrossRef]
43. Appendini, P.; Hotchkiss, J.H. Review of antimicrobial food packaging. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2002, 3, 113–126.
[CrossRef]
44. Zanetti, M.; Carniel, T.K.; Dalcanton, F.; dos Anjos, R.S.; Riella, H.G.; de Araújo, P.H.; de Oliveira, D.; Fiori, M.A. Use of
encapsulated natural compounds as antimicrobial additives in food packaging: A brief review. Trends Food Sci. Technol.
2018, 81, 51–60. [CrossRef]
45. Ribeiro-Santos, R.; Andrade, M.; Sanches-Silva, A. Application of encapsulated essential oils as antimicrobial agents in food
packaging. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2017, 14, 78–84. [CrossRef]
46. Khaneghah, A.M.; Hashemi, S.M.B.; Limbo, S. Antimicrobial agents and packaging systems in antimicrobial active food packaging:
An overview of approaches and interactions. Food Bioprod. Process. 2018, 111, 1–19. [CrossRef]
47. Sung, S.Y.; Sin, L.T.; Tee, T.T.; Bee, S.T.; Rahmat, A.R.; Rahman, W.A.W.A.; Vikhraman, M. Antimicrobial agents for food packaging
applications. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2013, 33, 110–123. [CrossRef]
48. Muriel-Galet, V.; Cerisuelo, J.P.; López-Carballo, G.; Aucejo, S.; Gavara, R.; Hernández-Muñoz, P. Evaluation of EVOH-coated PP
films with oregano essential oil and citral to improve the shelf-life of packaged salad. Food Control 2013, 30, 137–143. [CrossRef]
49. Atef, M.; Rezaei, M.; Behrooz, R. Characterization of physical, mechanical, and antibacterial properties of agar-cellulose
bionanocomposite films incorporated with savory essential oil. Food Hydrocoll. 2015, 45, 150–157. [CrossRef]
50. Nostro, A.; Scaffaro, R.; D’Arrigo, M.; Botta, L.; Filocamo, A.; Marino, A.; Bisignano, G. Development and characterization
of essential oil component-based polymer films: A potential approach to reduce bacterial biofilm. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.
2013, 97, 9515–9523. [CrossRef]
51. Ramos, M.; Jiménez, A.; Peltzer, M.; Garrigós, M.C. Characterization and antimicrobial activity studies of polypropylene films
with carvacrol and thymol for active packaging. J. Food Eng. 2012, 109, 513–519. [CrossRef]
52. Remedio, L.N.; dos Santos, J.W.S.; Maciel, V.B.V.; Yoshida, C.M.P.; de Carvalho, R.A. Characterization of active chitosan films as a
vehicle of potassium sorbate or nisin antimicrobial agents. Food Hydrocoll. 2019, 87, 830–838. [CrossRef]
53. Sung, S.Y.; Sin, L.T.; Tee, T.T.; Bee, S.T.; Rahmat, A.R. Effects of Allium sativum essence oil as antimicrobial agent for food
packaging plastic film. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2014, 26, 406–414. [CrossRef]
54. Mahmud, J.; Khan, R.A. Characterization of natural antimicrobials in food system. Adv. Microbiol. 2018, 8, 894. [CrossRef]
55. Arshad, M.S.; Batool, S.A. Natural antimicrobials, their sources and food safety. In Food Additives; Karunaratne, D.N.,
Pamunuwa, G., Eds.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2017; pp. 87–102.
56. Garcia-Fuentes, A.R.; Wirtz, S.; Vos, E.; Verhagen, H. Short review of sulphites as food additives. Eur. J. Nutr. Food Saf.
2015, 5, 113–120. [CrossRef]
57. Kuorwel, K.K.; Cran, M.J.; Sonneveld, K.; Miltz, J.; Bigger, S.W. Essential oils and their principal constituents as antimicrobial
agents for synthetic packaging films. J. Food Sci. 2011, 76, R164–R177. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
58. Gyawali, R.; Ibrahim, S.A. Natural products as antimicrobial agents. Food Control 2014, 46, 412–429. [CrossRef]
59. Hanušová, K.; Dobiáš, J.; Klaudisová, K. Effect of packaging films releasing antimicrobial agents on stability of food products.
Czech J. Food Sci 2009, 27, 347–349. [CrossRef]
60. Fullerton, M.; Khatiwada, J.; Johnson, J.U.; Davis, S.; Williams, L.L. Determination of antimicrobial activity of sorrel
(Hibiscus sabdariffa) on Esherichia coli O157: H7 isolated from food, veterinary, and clinical samples. J. Med. Food 2011, 14, 950–956.
[CrossRef]
Processes 2023, 11, 590 24 of 30

61. Khaldi, N.; Seifuddin, F.T.; Turner, G.; Haft, D.; Nierman, W.C.; Wolfe, K.H.; Fedorova, N.D. SMURF: Genomic mapping of fungal
secondary metabolite clusters. Fungal Genet. Biol. 2010, 47, 736–741. [CrossRef]
62. Saeed, F.; Afzaal, M.; Tufail, T.; Ahmad, A. Use of Natural Antimicrobial Agents: A Safe Preservation Approach. Intechopen
2019, 17, 1–18.
63. Bocquet, L.; Sahpaz, S.; Rivière, C. An overview of the antimicrobial properties of hop. In Natural Antimicrobial Agents; Mérillon, J.M.,
Rivière, C., Eds.; Series Sustainable Development and Biodiversity; Springer International Publishing AG: Cham, Switzerland, 2018;
Volume 19, pp. 31–54.
64. Del Nobile, M.A.; Lucera, A.; Costa, C.; Conte, A. Food applications of natural antimicrobial compounds. Front. Microbiol. 2012, 3, 287.
65. Gutierrez, J.; Barry-Ryan, C.; Bourke, P. The antimicrobial efficacy of plant essential oil combinations and interactions with food
ingredients. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2008, 124, 91–97. [CrossRef]
66. Zhong, Y.; Godwin, P.; Jin, Y.; Xiao, H. Biodegradable polymers and green-based antimicrobial packaging materials: A mini-review.
Adv. Ind. Eng. Polym. Res. 2020, 3, 27–35. [CrossRef]
67. Do Evangelho, J.A.; da Silva Dannenberg, G.; Biduski, B.; El Halal, S.L.M.; Kringel, D.H.; Gularte, M.A.; Fiorentini, A.M.;
da Rosa Zavareze, E. Antibacterial activity, optical, mechanical, and barrier properties of corn starch films containing orange
essential oil. Carbohydr. Polym. 2019, 222, 114981. [CrossRef]
68. Jha, P. Effect of plasticizer and antimicrobial agents on functional properties of bionanocomposite films based on corn starch-
chitosan for food packaging applications. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 160, 571–582. [CrossRef]
69. Zhang, Z.; Zhou, X.; Wang, D.; Fang, C.; Zhang, W.; Wang, C.; Huang, Z. Lysozyme-based composite membranes and their
potential application for active packaging. Food Biosci. 2021, 42, 101078. [CrossRef]
70. Radfar, R.; Hosseini, H.; Farhoodi, M.; Ghasemi, I.; Średnicka-Tober, D.; Shamloo, E.; Khaneghah, A.M. Optimization of
antibacterial and mechanical properties of an active LDPE/starch/nanoclay nanocomposite film incorporated with date palm
seed extract using D-optimal mixture design approach. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 158, 790–799. [CrossRef]
71. Guo, F.; Aryana, S.; Han, Y.; Jiao, Y. A review of the synthesis and applications of polymer–nanoclay composites. Appl. Sci.
2018, 8, 1696. [CrossRef]
72. Cesur, S.; Köroğlu, C.; Yalçın, H.T. Antimicrobial and biodegradable food packaging applications of polycaprolactone/organo
nanoclay/chitosan polymeric composite films. J. Vinyl Addit. Technol. 2018, 24, 376–387. [CrossRef]
73. Sedlarik, V. Antimicrobial modifications of polymers. In Biodegradation-Life of Science; InTech: Hampshire, UK, 2013; pp. 187–204.
74. Del Nobile, M.A.; Conte, A.; Buonocore, G.G.; Incoronato, A.L.; Massaro, A.; Panza, O. Active packaging by extrusion processing
of recyclable and biodegradable polymers. J. Food Eng. 2009, 93, 1–6. [CrossRef]
75. Gherardi, R.; Becerril, R.; Nerin, C.; Bosetti, O. Development of a multilayer antimicrobial packaging material for tomato puree
using an innovative technology. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 72, 361–367. [CrossRef]
76. Lei, J.; Yang, L.; Zhan, Y.; Wang, Y.; Ye, T.; Li, Y.; Li, B. Plasma treated polyethylene terephthalate/polypropylene films assembled
with chitosan and various preservatives for antimicrobial food packaging. Colloids Surf. B: Biointerfaces 2014, 114, 60–66. [CrossRef]
77. Abarca, R.L.; Rodríguez, F.J.; Guarda, A.; Galotto, M.J.; Bruna, J.E. Characterization of beta-cyclodextrin inclusion complexes
containing an essential oil component. Food Chem. 2016, 196, 968–975. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
78. Kayaci, F.; Sen, H.S.; Durgun, E.; Uyar, T. Functional electrospun polymeric nanofibers incorporating geraniol–cyclodextrin
inclusion complexes: High thermal stability and enhanced durability of geraniol. Food Res. Int. 2014, 62, 424–431. [CrossRef]
79. Patiño Vidal, C.; López de Dicastillo, C.; Rodríguez-Mercado, F.; Guarda, A.; Galotto, M.J.; Muñoz-Shugulí, C. Electrospinning
and cyclodextrin inclusion complexes: An emerging technological combination for developing novel active food packaging
materials. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2022, 62, 5495–5510. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
80. Al-Nasiri, G.; Cran, M.J.; Smallridge, A.J.; Bigger, S.W. Optimisation of β-cyclodextrin inclusion complexes with natural
antimicrobial agents: Thymol, carvacrol and linalool. J. Microencapsul. 2018, 35, 26–35. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
81. Silva, F.; Domingues, F.C.; Nerín, C. Control microbial growth on fresh chicken meat using pinosylvin inclusion complexes based
packaging absorbent pads. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 89, 148–154. [CrossRef]
82. Gómez-Estaca, J.; De Lacey, A.L.; López-Caballero, M.E.; Gómez-Guillén, M.C.; Montero, P. Biodegradable gelatin–chitosan films
incorporated with essential oils as antimicrobial agents for fish preservation. Food Microbiol. 2010, 27, 889–896. [CrossRef]
83. Shen, X.L.; Wu, J.M.; Chen, Y.; Zhao, G. Antimicrobial and physical properties of sweet potato starch films incorporated with
potassium sorbate or chitosan. Food Hydrocoll. 2010, 24, 285–290. [CrossRef]
84. Huang, W.; Xu, H.; Xue, Y.; Huang, R.; Deng, H.; Pan, S. Layer-by-layer immobilization of lysozyme–chitosan–organic rectorite
composites on electrospun nanofibrous mats for pork preservation. Food Res. Int. 2012, 48, 784–791. [CrossRef]
85. Treviño-Garza, M.Z.; García, S.; del Socorro Flores-González, M.; Arévalo-Niño, K. Edible active coatings based on pectin,
pullulan, and chitosan increase quality and shelf life of strawberries (Fragaria ananassa). J. Food Sci. 2015, 80, M1823–M1830.
[CrossRef]
86. Soysal, Ç.; Bozkurt, H.; Dirican, E.; Güçlü, M.; Bozhüyük, E.D.; Uslu, A.E.; Kaya, S. Effect of antimicrobial packaging on
physicochemical and microbial quality of chicken drumsticks. Food Control 2015, 54, 294–299. [CrossRef]
87. Moreno, O.; Atarés, L.; Chiralt, A.; Cruz-Romero, M.C.; Kerry, J. Starch-gelatin antimicrobial packaging materials to extend the
shelf life of chicken breast fillets. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 97, 483–490. [CrossRef]
88. Da Rocha Neto, A.C.; Beaudry, R.; Maraschin, M.; Di Piero, R.M.; Almenar, E. Double-bottom antimicrobial packaging for apple
shelf-life extension. Food Chem. 2019, 279, 379–388. [CrossRef]
Processes 2023, 11, 590 25 of 30

89. Xiong, Y.; Li, S.; Warner, R.D.; Fang, Z. Effect of oregano essential oil and resveratrol nanoemulsion loaded pectin edible coating
on the preservation of pork loin in modified atmosphere packaging. Food Control 2020, 114, 107226. [CrossRef]
90. Hemmatkhah, F.; Zeynali, F.; Almasi, H. Encapsulated cumin seed essential oil-loaded active papers: Characterization and
evaluation of the effect on quality attributes of beef hamburger. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2020, 13, 533–547. [CrossRef]
91. Han, J.H. Antimicrobial food packaging. Nov. Food Packag. Tech. 2003, 8, 50–70.
92. Irkin, R.; Esmer, O.K. Novel food packaging systems with natural antimicrobial agents. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 52, 6095–6111.
[CrossRef]
93. Huang, T.; Qian, Y.; Wei, J.; Zhou, C. Polymeric antimicrobial food packaging and its applications. Polymers 2019, 11, 560.
[CrossRef]
94. Tunç, S.; Duman, O. Preparation of active antimicrobial methyl cellulose/carvacrol/montmorillonite nanocomposite films and
investigation of carvacrol release. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2011, 44, 465–472. [CrossRef]
95. Contreras, C.B.; Charles, G.; Toselli, R.; Strumia, M.C. Antimicrobial active packaging. In Biopackaging; Masuelli, M.A., Ed.;
Taylor & Francis Group, LLC: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2018; pp. 36–58.
96. Otoni, C.G.; Espitia, P.J.; Avena-Bustillos, R.J.; McHugh, T.H. Trends in antimicrobial food packaging systems: Emitting sachets
and absorbent pads. Food Res. Int. 2016, 83, 60–73. [CrossRef]
97. Karam, L.; Jama, C.; Dhulster, P.; Chihib, N.E. Study of surface interactions between peptides, materials and bacteria for setting
up antimicrobial surfaces and active food packaging. J. Mater. Environ. Sci. 2013, 4, 798–821.
98. Haghighi-Manesh, S.; Azizi, M.H. Active packaging systems with emphasis on its applications in dairy products. J. Food
Process Eng. 2017, 40, e12542. [CrossRef]
99. Gaikwad, K.K.; Singh, S.; Ajji, A. Moisture absorbers for food packaging applications. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2019, 17, 609–628.
[CrossRef]
100. Ghosh, T.; Katiyar, V. Advanced Packaging Technology for Improved Delivery of Edible Packaged Products. In Nanotechnology in
Edible Food Packaging; Springer: Singapore, 2021; pp. 351–369.
101. Roohinejad, S.; Khaneghah, A.M.; Greiner, R.; Barba, F.J.; Koubaa, M.; de Souza Sant’Ana, A.; Bekhit, A.E.D.A. New developments
in meat packaging and meat products. In Advances in Meat Processing Technology; CRC Press: London, UK, 2017; pp. 521–553.
102. Lee, D. S Carbon dioxide absorbers for food packaging applications. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 57, 146–155. [CrossRef]
103. Mane, K.A. A review on active packaging: An innovation in food packaging. Int. J. Environ. Agric. Biotechnol. 2016, 1, 238566.
[CrossRef]
104. Hempel, A.W.; O’Sullivan, M.G.; Papkovsky, D.B.; Kerry, J.P. Use of smart packaging technologies for monitoring and extending
the shelf-life quality of modified atmosphere packaged (MAP) bread: Application of intelligent oxygen sensors and active ethanol
emitters. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2013, 237, 117–124. [CrossRef]
105. Bhat, S.N.; Bhat, S.V. Technological innovations in modern food packaging systems: Active packaging. EC Nutr. 2019, 14, 01–06.
106. Lee, Y.; Burgess, G.; Rubino, M.; Auras, R. Reaction and diffusion of chlorine dioxide gas under dark and light conditions at
different temperatures. J. Food Eng. 2015, 144, 20–28. [CrossRef]
107. Aday, M.S.; Caner, C. The applications of ‘active packaging and chlorine dioxide for extended shelf life of fresh strawberries.
Packag. Technol. Sci. 2011, 24, 123–136. [CrossRef]
108. Trinetta, V.; Morgan, M.; Linton, R. Chlorine dioxide for microbial decontamination of food. In Microbial Decontamination in the
Food Industry; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2012; pp. 533–562.
109. Ray, S.; Jin, T.; Fan, X.; Liu, L.; Yam, K.L. Development of chlorine dioxide releasing film and its application in decontaminating
fresh produce. J. Food Sci. 2013, 78, M276–M284. [CrossRef]
110. Pereira de Abreu, D.A.; Cruz, J.M.; Paseiro Losada, P. Active and intelligent packaging for the food industry. Food Rev. Int.
2012, 28, 146–187. [CrossRef]
111. Sivakanthan, S.; Rajendran, S.; Gamage, A.; Madhujith, T.; Mani, S. Antioxidant and antimicrobial applications of biopolymers: A
review. Food Res. Int. 2020, 136, 109327. [CrossRef]
112. Sayed, S.; Jardine, M.A. Antimicrobial biopolymers. In Advanced Functional Materials; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA,
2015; pp. 493–533.
113. Santos, M.R.; Fonseca, A.C.; Mendonça, P.V.; Branco, R.; Serra, A.C.; Morais, P.V.; Coelho, J.F. Recent developments in antimicrobial
polymers: A review. Materials 2016, 9, 599. [CrossRef]
114. Wang, H.; Qian, J.; Ding, F. Emerging chitosan-based films for food packaging applications. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2018, 66, 395–413.
[CrossRef]
115. Perinelli, D.R.; Fagioli, L.; Campana, R.; Lam, J.K.; Baffone, W.; Palmieri, G.F.; Bonacucina, G. Chitosan-based nanosystems and
their exploited antimicrobial activity. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2018, 117, 8–20. [CrossRef]
116. Kumar, S.; Mukherjee, A.; Dutta, J. Chitosan based nanocomposite films and coatings: Emerging antimicrobial food packaging
alternatives. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 97, 196–209. [CrossRef]
117. Silberbauer, A.; Schmid, M. Packaging concepts for ready-to-eat food: Recent progress. J. Packag. Technol. Res. 2017, 1, 113–126.
[CrossRef]
118. Ahmed, S.; Ahmad, M.; Ikram, S. Chitosan: A natural antimicrobial agent-a review. J. Appl. Chem. 2014, 3, 493–503.
119. Verlee, A.; Mincke, S.; Stevens, C.V. Recent developments in antibacterial and antifungal chitosan and its derivatives.
Carbohydr. Polym. 2017, 164, 268–283. [CrossRef]
Processes 2023, 11, 590 26 of 30

120. Priyadarshi, R.; Rhim, J.W. Chitosan-based biodegradable functional films for food packaging applications. Innov. Food Sci.
Emerg. Technol. 2020, 62, 102346. [CrossRef]
121. Zhu, J.; Wu, H.; Sun, Q. Preparation of crosslinked active bilayer film based on chitosan and alginate for regulating ascorbate-
glutathione cycle of postharvest cherry tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum). Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 130, 584–594. [CrossRef]
122. Carbone, M.; Donia, D.T.; Sabbatella, G.; Antiochia, R. Silver nanoparticles in polymeric matrices for fresh food packaging. J. King
Saud Univ. -Sci. 2016, 28, 273–279. [CrossRef]
123. Sharma, S.; Kumar, S.; Bulchandini, B.; Taneja, S.; Banyal, S. Green synthesis of silver nanoparticles and their antimicrobial activity
against gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Int. J. Biotechnol. Bioeng. Res. 2013, 4, 711–714.
124. Espitia, P.J.P.; Otoni, C.G.; Soares, N.F.F. Zinc oxide nanoparticles for food packaging applications. In Antimicrobial Food Packaging;
Barros-Velázquez, J., Ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2016; pp. 425–431.
125. Espitia, P.J.P.; Soares, N.D.F.F.; Botti, L.C.M.; Melo, N.R.D.; Pereira, O.L.; Silva, W.A.D. Assessment of the efficiency of essential
oils in the preservation of postharvest papaya in an antimicrobial packaging system. Braz. J. Food Technol. 2012, 15, 333–342.
[CrossRef]
126. Sun, X.; Wang, Z.; Kadouh, H.; Zhou, K. The antimicrobial, mechanical, physical and structural properties of chitosan-gallic acid
films. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2014, 57, 83–89. [CrossRef]
127. Genskowsky, E.; Puente, L.A.; Pérez-Álvarez, J.A.; Fernandez-Lopez, J.; Muñoz, L.A.; Viuda-Martos, M. Assessment of antibacte-
rial and antioxidant properties of chitosan edible films incorporated with maqui berry (Aristotelia chilensis). LWT-Food Sci. Technol.
2015, 64, 1057–1062. [CrossRef]
128. Siripatrawan, U.; Vitchayakitti, W. Improving functional properties of chitosan films as active food packaging by incorporating
with propolis. Food Hydrocoll. 2016, 61, 695–702. [CrossRef]
129. Abdollahi, M.; Rezaei, M.; Farzi, G. Improvement of active chitosan film properties with rosemary essential oil for food packaging.
Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2012, 47, 847–853. [CrossRef]
130. Liu, Y.; Yuan, Y.; Duan, S.; Li, C.; Hu, B.; Liu, A.; Wu, W. Preparation and characterization of chitosan films with three kinds of
molecular weight for food packaging. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 155, 249–259. [CrossRef]
131. Li, C.; Pei, J.; Zhu, S.; Song, Y.; Xiong, X.; Xue, F. Development of Chitosan/Peptide Films: Physical, Antibacterial and Antioxidant
Properties. Coatings 2020, 10, 1193. [CrossRef]
132. Cuevas-Acuña, D.A.; Plascencia-Jatomea, M.; Santacruz-Ortega, H.D.C.; Torres-Arreola, W.; Ezquerra-Brauer, J.M. Development of
chitosan/squid skin gelatin hydrolysate films: Structural, physical, antioxidant, and antifungal properties. Coatings 2021, 11, 1088.
[CrossRef]
133. Musella, E.; Ouazzani, I.C.E.; Mendes, A.R.; Rovera, C.; Farris, S.; Mena, C.; Teixeira, P.; Poças, F. Preparation and Characteri-
zation of Bioactive Chitosan-Based Films Incorporated with Olive Leaves Extract for Food Packaging Applications. Coatings
2021, 11, 1339. [CrossRef]
134. Youssef, A.M.; Abou-Yousef, H.; El-Sayed, S.M.; Kamel, S. Mechanical and antibacterial properties of novel high-performance
chitosan/nanocomposite films. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2015, 76, 25–32. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
135. Priyadarshi, R.; Negi, Y.S. Effect of varying filler concentration on zinc oxide nanoparticle embedded chitosan films as potential
food packaging material. J. Polym. Environ. 2017, 25, 1087–1098. [CrossRef]
136. Mohamed, N.; Madian, N.G. Evaluation of the mechanical, physical and antimicrobial properties of chitosan thin films doped
with greenly synthesized silver nanoparticles. Mater. Today Commun. 2020, 25, 101372. [CrossRef]
137. Yadav, S.; Mehrotra, G.K.; Dutta, P.K. Chitosan based ZnO nanoparticles loaded gallic-acid films for active food packaging.
Food Chem. 2021, 334, 127605. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
138. Gasti, T.; Dixit, S.; Hiremani, V.D.; Chougale, R.B.; Masti, S.P.; Vootla, S.K.; Mudigoudra, B.S. Chitosan/pullulan-based films
incorporated with clove essential oil loaded chitosan-ZnO hybrid nanoparticles for active food packaging. Carbohydr. Polym.
2022, 277, 118866. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
139. Li, Z.; Jiang, X.; Huang, H.; Liu, A.; Liu, H.; Abid, N.; Ming, L. Chitosan/zein films incorporated with essential oil nanoparticles
and nanoemulsions: Similarities and differences. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2022, 208, 983–994. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
140. Alghamdi, H.M.; Abutalib, M.M.; Rajeh, A.; Mannaa, M.A.; Nur, O.; Abdelrazek, E.M. Effect of the Fe2O3/TiO2 nanoparticles on
the structural, mechanical, electrical properties and antibacterial activity of the biodegradable chitosan/polyvinyl alcohol blend
for food packaging. J. Polym. Environ. 2022, 30, 3865–3874. [CrossRef]
141. Bhat, V.G.; Narasagoudr, S.S.; Masti, S.P.; Chougale, R.B.; Vantamuri, A.B.; Kasai, D. Development and evaluation of Moringa
extract incorporated Chitosan/Guar gum/Poly (vinyl alcohol) active films for food packaging applications. Int. J. Biol. Macromol.
2022, 200, 50–60. [CrossRef]
142. Surendhiran, D.; Roy, V.C.; Park, J.S.; Chun, B.S. Fabrication of chitosan-based food packaging film impregnated with turmeric
essential oil (TEO)-loaded magnetic-silica nanocomposites for surimi preservation. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2022, 203, 650–660.
[CrossRef]
143. Santos, J.C.; Sousa, R.C.; Otoni, C.G.; Moraes, A.R.; Souza, V.G.; Medeiros, E.A.; Soares, N.F. Nisin and other antimicrobial
peptides: Production, mechanisms of action, and application in active food packaging. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol.
2018, 48, 179–194. [CrossRef]
144. Qin, Y.; Liu, Y.; Yuan, L.; Yong, H.; Liu, J. Preparation and characterization of antioxidant, antimicrobial and pH-sensitive films
based on chitosan, silver nanoparticles and purple corn extract. Food Hydrocoll. 2019, 96, 102–111. [CrossRef]
Processes 2023, 11, 590 27 of 30

145. Salari, M.; Khiabani, M.S.; Mokarram, R.R.; Ghanbarzadeh, B.; Kafil, H.S. Development and evaluation of chitosan-based active
nanocomposite films containing bacterial cellulose nanocrystals and silver nanoparticles. Food Hydrocoll. 2018, 84, 414–423.
[CrossRef]
146. Koosha, M.; Hamedi, S. Intelligent Chitosan/PVA nanocomposite films containing black carrot anthocyanin and bentonite
nanoclays with improved mechanical, thermal and antibacterial properties. Prog. Org. Coat. 2019, 127, 338–347. [CrossRef]
147. Indumathi, M.P.; Rajarajeswari, G.R. Mahua oil-based polyurethane/chitosan/nano ZnO composite films for biodegradable food
packaging applications. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 124, 163–174.
148. Al-Naamani, L.; Dobretsov, S.; Dutta, J. Chitosan-zinc oxide nanoparticle composite coating for active food packaging applications.
Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2016, 38, 231–237. [CrossRef]
149. Zhang, Z.Y.; Xiong, H.M. Photoluminescent ZnO nanoparticles and their biological applications. Materials 2015, 8, 3101–3127.
[CrossRef]
150. Emamifar, A. Applications of Antimicrobial Polymer Nanocomposites in Food Packaging. In Advances in Nanocomposite Technology;
Hashim, A., Ed.; InTech: Rijeka, Croatia, 2011; pp. 299–318.
151. Bastarrachea, L.; Dhawan, S.; Sablani, S.S. Engineering properties of polymeric-based antimicrobial films for food packaging: A
review. Food Eng. Rev. 2011, 3, 79–93. [CrossRef]
152. López-Carballo, G.; Gómez-Estaca, J.; Catalá, R.; Hernández-Muñoz, P.; Gavara, R. Active antimicrobial food and beverage
packaging. In Emerging Food Packaging Technologies; Yam, K.L., Lee, D.S., Eds.; Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science,
Technology and Nutrition; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2012; pp. 27–54.
153. Hauser, C.; Wunderlich, J. Antimicrobial packaging films with a sorbic acid based coating. Procedia Food Sci. 2011, 1, 197–202.
[CrossRef]
154. Shetty, K.K.; Dwelle, R.B. Disease and sprout control in individually film wrapped potatoes. Am. Potato J. 1990, 67, 705–718.
[CrossRef]
155. Fu, Y.; Dudley, E.G. Antimicrobial-coated films as food packaging: A review. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2021, 20, 3404–3437.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
156. Torlak, E.; Nizamlioğlu, M. Antimicrobial effectiveness of chitosan-essential oil coated plastic films against foodborne pathogens.
J. Plast. Film Sheeting 2011, 27, 235–248. [CrossRef]
157. Torlak, E.; Sert, D. Antibacterial effectiveness of chitosan–propolis coated polypropylene films against foodborne pathogens.
Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2013, 60, 52–55. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
158. La Storia, A.; Mauriello, G.; Villani, F.; Ercolini, D. Coating-activation and antimicrobial efficacy of different polyethylene films
with a nisin-based solution. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2013, 6, 2770–2779. [CrossRef]
159. Guo, M.; Jin, T.Z.; Yang, R. Antimicrobial polylactic acid packaging films against Listeria and Salmonella in culture medium and
on ready-to-eat meat. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2014, 7, 3293–3307. [CrossRef]
160. Honarvar, Z.; Farhoodi, M.; Khani, M.R.; Mohammadi, A.; Shokri, B.; Ferdowsi, R.; Shojaee-Aliabadi, S. Application of cold
plasma to develop carboxymethyl cellulose-coated polypropylene films containing essential oil. Carbohydr. Polym. 2017, 176, 1–10.
[CrossRef]
161. Mulla, M.; Ahmed, J.; Al-Attar, H.; Castro-Aguirre, E.; Arfat, Y.A.; Auras, R. Antimicrobial efficacy of clove essential oil infused
into chemically modified LLDPE film for chicken meat packaging. Food Control 2017, 73, 663–671. [CrossRef]
162. Fasihnia, S.H.; Peighambardoust, S.H.; Peighambardoust, S.J.; Oromiehie, A. Development of novel active polypropylene based
packaging films containing different concentrations of sorbic acid. Food Packag. Shelf Life 2018, 18, 87–94. [CrossRef]
163. Kolarova Raskova, Z.; Stahel, P.; Sedlarikova, J.; Musilova, L.; Stupavska, M.; Lehocky, M. The effect of plasma pretreatment and
cross-linking degree on the physical and antimicrobial properties of nisin-coated PVA films. Materials 2018, 11, 1451. [CrossRef]
164. Hu, S.; Li, P.; Wei, Z.; Wang, J.; Wang, H.; Wang, Z. Antimicrobial activity of nisin-coated polylactic acid film facilitated by cold
plasma treatment. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2018, 135, 46844. [CrossRef]
165. Munteanu, B.S.; Sacarescu, L.; Vasiliu, A.L.; Hitruc, G.E.; Pricope, G.M.; Sivertsvik, M.; Vasile, C. Antioxidant/antibacterial
electrospun nanocoatings applied onto PLA films. Materials 2018, 11, 1973. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
166. Valerini, D.; Tammaro, L.; Di Benedetto, F.; Vigliotta, G.; Capodieci, L.; Terzi, R.; Rizzo, A. Aluminium-doped zinc oxide coatings
on polylactic acid films for antimicrobial food packaging. Thin Solid Film. 2018, 645, 187–192. [CrossRef]
167. Degli Esposti, M.; Toselli, M.; Sabia, C.; Messi, P.; de Niederhäusern, S.; Bondi, M.; Iseppi, R. Effectiveness of polymeric coated
films containing bacteriocin-producer living bacteria for Listeria monocytogenes control under simulated cold chain break.
Food Microbiol. 2018, 76, 173–179. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
168. Yang, W.; Xie, Y.; Jin, J.; Liu, H.; Zhang, H. Development and Application of an Active Plastic Multilayer Film by Coating a
Plantaricin BM-1 for Chilled Meat Preservation. J. Food Sci. 2019, 84, 1864–1870. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
169. Baldevraj, R.M.; Jagadish, R.S. Incorporation of chemical antimicrobial agents into polymeric films for food packaging.
In Multifunctional and Nanoreinforced Polymers for Food Packaging; Lagarón, J.-M., Ed.; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK,
2011; pp. 368–420.
170. Rocha, M.; Ferreira, F.A.; Souza, M.M.; Prentice, C. Antimicrobial films: A review. Microb. Pathog. Strateg. Combat. Sci.
Technol. Educ. 2013, 1, 23–31.
171. López, O.V.; Giannuzzi, L.; Zaritzky, N.E.; García, M.A. Potassium sorbate controlled release from corn starch films. Mater. Sci. Eng.
2013, 33, 1583–1591. [CrossRef]
Processes 2023, 11, 590 28 of 30

172. Barzegar, H.; Azizi, M.H.; Barzegar, M.; Hamidi-Esfahani, Z. Effect of potassium sorbate on antimicrobial and physical properties
of starch–clay nanocomposite films. Carbohydr. Polym. 2014, 110, 26–31. [CrossRef]
173. Kuplennik, N.; Tchoudakov, R.; Zelas, Z.B.B.; Sadovski, A.; Fishman, A.; Narkis, M. Antimicrobial packaging based on linear
low-density polyethylene compounded with potassium sorbate. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 62, 278–286. [CrossRef]
174. Fasihnia, S.H.; Peighambardoust, S.H.; Peighambardoust, S.J.; Oromiehie, A.; Soltanzadeh, M.; Pateiro, M.; Lorenzo, J.M.
Properties and application of multifunctional composite polypropylene-based films incorporating a combination of BHT, BHA
and sorbic acid in extending donut shelf-life. Molecules 2020, 25, 5197. [CrossRef]
175. Oliveira, C.D.M.; Gomes, B.D.O.; Batista, A.F.; Mikcha, J.M.; Yamashita, F.; Scapim, M.R.; Bergamasco, R.D.C. Development
of sorbic acid microcapsules and application in starch-poly (butylene adipate co-terephthalate) films. J. Food Process. Preserv.
2021, 45, e15459. [CrossRef]
176. Imran, M.; Klouj, A.; Revol-Junelles, A.M.; Desobry, S. Controlled release of nisin from HPMC, sodium caseinate, poly-lactic acid
and chitosan for active packaging applications. J. Food Eng. 2014, 143, 178–185. [CrossRef]
177. Zehetmeyer, G.; Meira, S.M.M.; Scheibel, J.M.; de Oliveira, R.V.B.; Brandelli, A.; Soares, R.M.D. Influence of melt processing on
biodegradable nisin-PBAT films intended for active food packaging applications. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2016, 133, 1–10. [CrossRef]
178. Lopresti, F.; Botta, L.; La Carrubba, V.; Di Pasquale, L.; Settanni, L.; Gaglio, R. Combining carvacrol and nisin in biodegradable
films for antibacterial packaging applications. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 193, 117–126. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
179. Shankar, S.; Rhim, J.W. Preparation of antibacterial poly (lactide)/poly (butylene adipate-co-terephthalate) composite films
incorporated with grapefruit seed extract. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2018, 120, 846–852. [CrossRef]
180. Shankar, S.; Wang, L.F.; Rhim, J.W. Incorporation of zinc oxide nanoparticles improved the mechanical, water vapor barrier,
UV-light barrier, and antibacterial properties of PLA-based nanocomposite films. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2018, 93, 289–298. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
181. Mizielińska, M.; Kowalska, U.; Jarosz, M.; Sumińska, P.; Landercy, N.; Duquesne, E. The effect of UV aging on antimicrobial and
mechanical properties of PLA films with incorporated zinc oxide nanoparticles. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 794.
[CrossRef]
182. Perez Espitia, P.J.; de Fátima Ferreira Soares, N.; dos Reis Coimbra, J.S.; de Andrade, N.J.; Souza Cruz, R.; Alves Medeiros, E.A.
Bioactive peptides: Synthesis, properties, and applications in the packaging and preservation of food. Compr. Rev. Food Sci.
Food Saf. 2012, 11, 187–204. [CrossRef]
183. Vasile, C. Polymeric nanocomposites and nanocoatings for food packaging: A review. Materials 2018, 11, 1834. [CrossRef]
184. Bastarrachea, L.J. Antimicrobial polypropylene with ε-poly (lysine): Effectiveness under UV-A light and food storage applications.
LWT 2019, 102, 276–283. [CrossRef]
185. Doshna, N.A.; Herskovitz, J.E.; Redfearn, H.N.; Goddard, J.M. Antimicrobial Active Packaging Prepared by Reactive Extrusion of
ε-Poly l-lysine with Polypropylene. ACS Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 2, 391–399. [CrossRef]
186. Jung, J.; Zhao, Y. Antimicrobial packaging for fresh and minimally processed fruits and vegetables. In Antimicrobial Food Packaging;
Barros-Velázquez, J., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016; pp. 243–256.
187. Pérez-Gago, M.B.; Palou, L. Antimicrobial packaging for fresh and fresh-cut fruits and vegetables. In Fresh-Cut Fruits and
Vegetables: Technology, Physiology, and Safety; Pareek, S., Ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2016; pp. 403–452.
188. Alves Medeiros, E.A.; Ferreira Soares, N.D.F.; Sales Polito, T.D.O.; De Sousa, M.M.; Pereira Silva, D.F. Antimicrobial sachets
post-harvest mango fruits. Rev. Bras. De Frutic. 2011, 33, 363–370.
189. Ayala-Zavala, J.F.; Silva-Espinoza, B.A.; Cruz-Valenzuela, M.R.; Leyva, J.M.; Ortega-Ramírez, L.A.; Carrazco-Lugo, D.K.;
Miranda, M.R.A. Pectin–cinnamon leaf oil coatings add antioxidant and antibacterial properties to fresh-cut peach. Flavour Fragr. J.
2013, 28, 39–45. [CrossRef]
190. Espitia, P.J.P.; Soares, N.D.F.F.; dos Reis Coimbra, J.S.; de Andrade, N.J.; Cruz, R.S.; Medeiros, E.A.A. Zinc oxide nanoparticles:
Synthesis, antimicrobial activity and food packaging applications. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2012, 5, 1447–1464. [CrossRef]
191. Wattananawinrat, K.; Threepopnatkul, P.; Kulsetthanchalee, C. Morphological and thermal properties of LDPE/EVA blended
films and development of antimicrobial activity in food packaging film. Energy Procedia 2014, 56, 1–9. [CrossRef]
192. Salmieri, S.; Islam, F.; Khan, R.A.; Hossain, F.M.; Ibrahim, H.M.; Miao, C.; Hamad, W.Y.; Lacroix, M. Antimicrobial nanocomposite
films made of poly (lactic acid)–cellulose nanocrystals (PLA–CNC) in food applications—Part B: Effect of oregano essential oil
release on the inactivation of Listeria monocytogenes in mixed vegetables. Cellulose 2014, 21, 4271–4285. [CrossRef]
193. Shemesh, R.; Krepker, M.; Nitzan, N.; Vaxman, A.; Segal, E. Active packaging containing encapsulated carvacrol for control of
postharvest decay. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2016, 118, 175–182. [CrossRef]
194. Chang, Y.; Choi, I.; Cho, A.R.; Han, J. Reduction of Dickeya chrysanthemi on fresh-cut iceberg lettuce using antimicrobial sachet
containing microencapsulated oregano essential oil. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 82, 361–368. [CrossRef]
195. Kwon, S.J.; Chang, Y.; Han, J. Oregano essential oil-based natural antimicrobial packaging film to inactivate Salmonella enterica
and yeasts/molds in the atmosphere surrounding cherry tomatoes. Food Microbiol. 2017, 65, 114–121. [CrossRef]
196. Sangsuwan, J.; Sutthasupa, S. Effect of chitosan and alginate beads incorporated with lavender, clove essential oils, and vanillin
against Botrytis cinerea and their application in fresh table grapes packaging system. Packag. Technol. Sci. 2019, 32, 595–605.
[CrossRef]
197. Shapi’i, R.A.; Othman, S.H.; Nordin, N.; Basha, R.K.; Naim, M.N. Antimicrobial properties of starch films incorporated with
chitosan nanoparticles: In vitro and in vivo evaluation. Carbohydr. Polym. 2020, 230, 115602. [CrossRef]
Processes 2023, 11, 590 29 of 30

198. Motlagh, N.V.; Aliabadi, M.; Rahmani, E.; Ghorbanpour, S. The Effect of Nano-Silver Packaging on Quality Maintenance of Fresh
Strawberry. Int. J. Nutr. Food Eng. 2020, 14, 123–128.
199. Perdana, M.I.; Ruamcharoen, J.; Panphon, S.; Leelakriangsak, M. Antimicrobial activity and physical properties of starch/chitosan
film incorporated with lemongrass essential oil and its application. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 141, 110934. [CrossRef]
200. Cenci-Goga, B.T.; Iulietto, M.F.; Sechi, P.; Borgogni, E.; Karama, M.; Grispoldi, L. New Trends in Meat Packaging. Microbiol. Res.
2020, 11, 56–67. [CrossRef]
201. Kargozari, M.; Hamedi, H. Incorporation of essential oils (EOs) and nanoparticles (NPs) into active packaging systems in meat
and meat products: A review. Food Health 2019, 2, 16–30.
202. Bader, R.; Becila, S.; Ruiz, P.; Djeghim, F.; Sanah, I.; Boudjellal, A.; Leroy, S. Physicochemical and microbiological characteristics of
El-Guedid from meat of different animal species. Meat Sci. 2021, 171, 108277. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
203. Muhialdin, B.J.; Kadum, H.; Fathallah, S.; Hussin, A.S.M. Metabolomics profiling and antibacterial activity of fermented ginger
paste extends the shelf life of chicken meat. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 132, 109897. [CrossRef]
204. Talebi, F.; Misaghi, A.; Khanjari, A.; Kamkar, A.; Gandomi, H.; Rezaeigolestani, M. Incorporation of spice essential oils into
poly-lactic acid film matrix with the aim of extending microbiological and sensorial shelf life of ground beef. LWT-Food Sci. Technol.
2018, 96, 482–490. [CrossRef]
205. Rawdkuen, S.; Punbusayakul, N.; Lee, D.S. Antimicrobial packaging for meat products. In Antimicrobial Food Packaging, 1st ed.;
Barros-Velázquez, J., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016; pp. 229–241.
206. Fang, Z.; Zhao, Y.; Warner, R.D.; Johnson, S.K. Active and intelligent packaging in meat industry. Trends Food Sci. Technol.
2017, 61, 60–71. [CrossRef]
207. McMillin, K.W. Advancements in meat packaging. Meat Sci. 2017, 132, 153–162. [CrossRef]
208. Prabhu, R.; Devaraju, A. Developing an antimicrobial packaging to improve the shelf life of meat using silver zeolite coating on
BOPP film. Mater. Today: Proc. 2018, 5, 14553–14559. [CrossRef]
209. Barcenilla, C.; Ducic, M.; López, M.; Prieto, M.; Álvarez-Ordóñez, A. Application of lactic acid bacteria for the biopreservation of
meat products: A systematic review. Meat Sci. 2022, 183, 108661. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
210. Trbojevich, R.A.; Khare, S.; Lim, J.H.; Watanabe, F.; Gokulan, K.; Krohmaly, K.; Williams, K. Assessment of silver release and
biocidal capacity from silver nanocomposite food packaging materials. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2020, 145, 111728. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
211. Azlin-Hasim, S.; Cruz-Romero, M.C.; Ghoshal, T.; Morris, M.A.; Cummins, E.; Kerry, J.P. Application of silver nanodots for
potential use in antimicrobial packaging applications. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2015, 27, 136–143. [CrossRef]
212. Deus, D.; Kehrenberg, C.; Schaudien, D.; Klein, G.; Krischek, C. Effect of a nano-silver coating on the quality of fresh turkey meat
during storage after modified atmosphere or vacuum packaging. Poult. Sci. 2017, 96, 449–457. [CrossRef]
213. Kuuliala, L.; Pippuri, T.; Hultman, J.; Auvinen, S.M.; Kolppo, K.; Nieminen, T.; Jääskeläinen, E. Preparation and antimicrobial
characterization of silver-containing packaging materials for meat. Food Packag. Shelf Life 2015, 6, 53–60. [CrossRef]
214. Pabast, M.; Shariatifar, N.; Beikzadeh, S.; Jahed, G. Effects of chitosan coatings incorporating with free or nano-encapsulated
Satureja plant essential oil on quality characteristics of lamb meat. Food Control 2018, 91, 185–192. [CrossRef]
215. Tabatabaee Bafroee, A.S.; Khanjari, A.; Teimourifard, R.; Yarmahmoudi, F. Development of a novel active packaging film to retain
quality and prolong the shelf life of fresh minced lamb meat. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2020, 44, e14880. [CrossRef]
216. Esmaeili, H.; Cheraghi, N.; Khanjari, A.; Rezaeigolestani, M.; Basti, A.A.; Kamkar, A.; Aghaee, E.M. Incorporation of nanoen-
capsulated garlic essential oil into edible films: A novel approach for extending shelf life of vacuum-packed sausages. Meat Sci.
2020, 166, 108135. [CrossRef]
217. Syahida, S.N.; Ismail-Fitry, M.R.; Ainun, Z.M.A.; Hanani, Z.N. Effects of gelatin/palm wax/lemongrass essential oil (GPL)-coated
Kraft paper on the quality and shelf life of ground beef stored at 4 ◦ C. Food Packag. Shelf Life 2021, 28, 100640. [CrossRef]
218. Owusu-Kwarteng, J.; Akabanda, F.; Agyei, D.; Jespersen, L. Microbial safety of milk production and fermented dairy products in
Africa. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 752. [CrossRef]
219. Fernández, M.; Hudson, J.A.; Korpela, R.; de los Reyes-Gavilán, C.G. Impact on human health of microorganisms present in
fermented dairy products: An overview. BioMed Res. Int. 2015, 2015, 412714. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
220. Mirza Alizadeh, A.; Masoomian, M.; Shakooie, M.; Zabihzadeh Khajavi, M.; Farhoodi, M. Trends and applications of intelligent
packaging in dairy products: A review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2021, 62, 383–397. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
221. Karaman, A.D.; Özer, B.; Pascall, M.A.; Alvarez, V. Recent advances in dairy packaging. Food Rev. Int. 2015, 31, 295–318.
[CrossRef]
222. Ünalan, İ.U.; Arcan, I.; Korel, F.; Yemenicioğlu, A. Application of active zein-based films with controlled release properties to con-
trol Listeria monocytogenes growth and lipid oxidation in fresh Kashar cheese. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2013, 20, 208–214.
[CrossRef]
223. Nithya, V.; Murthy, P.S.K.; Halami, P.M. Development and application of active films for food packaging using antibacterial
peptide of B acillus licheniformis Me1. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2013, 115, 475–483. [CrossRef]
224. Han, J.H. A review of food packaging technologies and innovations. In Innovations in Food Packaging; Academic Press: Cambridge,
MA, USA, 2014; pp. 3–12.
225. Meira, S.M.M.; Zehetmeyer, G.; Scheibel, J.M.; Werner, J.O.; Brandelli, A. Starch-halloysite nanocomposites containing nisin:
Characterization and inhibition of Listeria monocytogenes in soft cheese. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 68, 226–234. [CrossRef]
Processes 2023, 11, 590 30 of 30

226. Ghasemi, S.; Javadi, N.H.S.; Moradi, M.; Khosravi-Darani, K. Application of zein antimicrobial edible film incorporating Zataria
multiflora boiss essential oil for preservation of Iranian ultrafiltered Feta cheese. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2015, 14, 2014–2021.
227. Peighambardoust, S.H.; Beigmohammadi, F.; Peighambardoust, S.J. Application of organoclay nanoparticle in low-density
polyethylene films for packaging of UF cheese. Packag. Technol. Sci. 2016, 29, 355–363. [CrossRef]
228. Beigmohammadi, F.; Peighambardoust, S.H.; Hesari, J.; Azadmard-Damirchi, S.; Peighambardoust, S.J.; Khosrowshahi, N.K.
Antibacterial properties of LDPE nanocomposite films in packaging of UF cheese. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 65, 106–111.
[CrossRef]
229. Da Silva Dannenberg, G.; Funck, G.D.; dos Santos Cruxen, C.E.; de Lima Marques, J.; da Silva, W.P.; Fiorentini, Â.M. Essential oil
from pink pepper as an antimicrobial component in cellulose acetate film: Potential for application as active packaging for sliced
cheese. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 81, 314–318. [CrossRef]
230. Li, W.; Li, L.; Zhang, H.; Yuan, M.; Qin, Y. Evaluation of PLA nanocomposite films on physicochemical and microbiological
properties of refrigerated cottage cheese. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2018, 42, e13362. [CrossRef]
231. Divsalar, E.; Tajik, H.; Moradi, M.; Forough, M.; Lotfi, M.; Kuswandi, B. Characterization of cellulosic paper coated with
chitosan-zinc oxide nanocomposite containing nisin and its application in packaging of UF cheese. Int. J. Biol. Macromol.
2018, 109, 1311–1318. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
232. Lotfi, M.; Tajik, H.; Moradi, M.; Forough, M.; Divsalar, E.; Kuswandi, B. Nanostructured chitosan/monolaurin film: Preparation,
characterization and antimicrobial activity against Listeria monocytogenes on ultrafiltered white cheese. LWT-Food Sci. Technol.
2018, 92, 576–583. [CrossRef]
233. Küçük, G.S.; Çelik, Ö.F.; Mazi, B.G.; Türe, H. Evaluation of alginate and zein films as a carrier of natamycin to increase the shelf
life of kashar cheese. Packag. Technol. Sci. 2020, 33, 39–48. [CrossRef]
234. De Moraes, J.O.; Hilton, S.T.; Moraru, C.I. The effect of pulsed light and starch films with antimicrobials on Listeria innocua and
the quality of sliced cheddar cheese during refrigerated storage. Food Control 2020, 112, 107134. [CrossRef]
235. Motelica, L.; Ficai, D.; Oprea, O.C.; Ficai, A.; Ene, V.L.; Vasile, B.S.; Holban, A.M. Antibacterial Biodegradable Films Based on
Alginate with Silver Nanoparticles and Lemongrass Essential Oil–Innovative Packaging for Cheese. Nanomaterials 2021, 11, 2377.
[CrossRef]
236. Chang, S.; Mohammadi Nafchi, A.; Baghaie, H. Development of an active packaging based on polyethylene containing linalool or
thymol for mozzarella cheese. Food Sci. Nutr. 2021, 9, 3732–3739. [CrossRef]
237. Fajardo, P.; Martins, J.T.; Fuciños, C.; Pastrana, L.; Teixeira, J.A.; Vicente, A.A. Evaluation of a chitosan-based edible film as carrier
of natamycin to improve the storability of Saloio cheese. J. Food Eng. 2010, 101, 349–356. [CrossRef]
238. Incoronato, A.L.; Conte, A.; Buonocore, G.G.; Del Nobile, M.A. Agar hydrogel with silver nanoparticles to prolong the shelf life of
Fior di Latte cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 2011, 94, 1697–1704. [CrossRef]
239. Otero, V.; Becerril, R.; Santos, J.A.; Rodríguez-Calleja, J.M.; Nerín, C.; García-López, M.L. Evaluation of two antimicrobial
packaging films against Escherichia coli O157: H7 strains in vitro and during storage of a Spanish ripened sheep cheese (Zamorano).
Food Control 2014, 42, 296–302. [CrossRef]
240. Kapetanakou, A.E.; Skandamis, P.N. Applications of active packaging for increasing microbial stability in foods: Natural volatile
antimicrobial compounds. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2016, 12, 1–12. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.